Re: performance of insert/delete/update
От | Andrew Sullivan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: performance of insert/delete/update |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20021126132439.K12832@mail.libertyrms.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: performance of insert/delete/update ("scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: performance of insert/delete/update
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:06:47AM -0700, scott.marlowe wrote: > So, the difference in performance was around 4% slower. > > I'd hardly consider that a big hit against the database. > > Note that in every test I've made up and run, the difference is at most 5% > with vacuumdb -z running continuously in the background. Big text fields, > lots of math, lots of fks, etc... Also, it's important to remember that you may see a considerable improvement in efficiency of some queries if you vacuum often, (it's partly dependent on the turnover in your database -- if it never changes, you don't need to vacuum often). So a 5% hit in regular performance may be worth it over the long haul, if certain queries are way cheaper to run. (That is, while you may get 4% slower performance overall, if the really slow queries are much faster, the fast queries running slower may well be worth it. In my case, certainly, I think it is.) A -- ---- Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada <andrew@libertyrms.info> M2P 2A8 +1 416 646 3304 x110
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: