Re: Performance related to size of tables
От | Mark Kirkwood |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance related to size of tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3FDA2F01.10205@paradise.net.nz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Performance related to size of tables (nbarraza@uolsinectis.com.ar) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
If you want to speed up the elapsed times, then the first thing would be to attempt to reduce the IO using some indexes, e.g. on test1(anumber), test2(anumber), test3((anumber%13)), test3((anumber%5)) and test4((anumber%27)) However if you wish to keep hammering the IO then the you would not use any indexes. However elapsed times for operations like: CREATE TABLE test4 AS SELECT ... FROM test1 JOIN test2 ON test1.anumber=test2.anumber; are going to increase non linearly with the size of the source table test1 (unless there are indexes on the anumber columns). I think this particular test is designed as a testbed for measuring IO performance - as opposed to Postgresql performance. regards Mark nbarraza@uolsinectis.com.ar wrote: >Hi everyone, >I found that performance get worse as the size of a given table >increases. I mean, for example I´ve just run some scripts shown in > >http://www.potentialtech.com/wmoran/postgresql.php > >I understand that those scripts are designed to see the behavior of postgresql under different filesystems. However, sincethem generate >a lot of I/O activity, I think they can be used to adjust some >configuration parameters. In that way, I increased the number of tuples inserted in the initial table to 2000000 and 3000000.What >I saw is that the running time goes from 3 min., to 11 min. My question is, is it possible to use that test to tune >some parameters?, if the answer is yes, what parameters should I change to get shorter running times? > > > >
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: