Re: performance tuning on inserts
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: performance tuning on inserts |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22434.1012250099@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: performance tuning on inserts ("Peter T. Brown" <peter@memeticsystems.com>) |
Список | pgsql-admin |
"Peter T. Brown" <peter@memeticsystems.com> writes: > Regarding the SQL: The query I showed there is built dynamically from a > library of queries chosen by the application user (using a web gui). For > now, I don't have any way to intelligently condense the often complex series > of operations into a single 'smart' query. Nonetheless, I wonder whether you couldn't reconsider the structure. The fragment you showed seemed to be of two minds about whether VisitorPointer is a permanent data structure or a suitable place for temporary row insertions... > That being said, I still don't understand why doing all those inserts should > take so long since the entire table should be in memory... I am pretty sure > I've allowed enough shared_buffers. You still need WAL traffic. Or don't you care whether those inserts will survive a system crash? In-RAM buffers surely don't count as stable storage. > Regarding timestamps in pg_xlog: as I understand things, if wal_buffers and > checkpoint_segments are high enough the files in pg_xlog should never be > used, right? No, you haven't understood things at all. WAL *will* be written whenever you make changes, at the latest when the transaction is committed. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: