Re: [PERFORM] Foreign key performance
От | Jan Wieck |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PERFORM] Foreign key performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3EA991F0.A201AC38@Yahoo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PERFORM] Foreign key performance (Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Stephan Szabo wrote: > > [Not sure this really is relevant for -performance at this point] > > On Thu, 17 Apr 2003, Stephan Szabo wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Apr 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com> writes: > > > > It appears (from some not terribly scientific experiments - see below) > > > > that it's likely to be related to managing the deferred trigger queue > > > > given that in my case at least running the constraints non-deferred was > > > > negligible in comparison. > > > > > > At one time the deferred-trigger queue had an O(N^2) behavioral problem > > > for large N = number of pending trigger events. But I thought we'd > > > fixed that. What's the test case exactly? Can you get a profile with > > > gprof? > > > > I'm going to tomorrow hopefully - but it looks to me that we fixed one, but > > Argh. I'm getting that state where gprof returns all 0s for times. I'm > pretty sure this has come up before along with how to get it to work, but > I couldn't find it in the archives. Someday I'll learn how to use gprof. :( You have to save and restore the timers around the fork() under Linux. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: