Re: Inefficient bytea escaping?
От | Andreas Pflug |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Inefficient bytea escaping? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 447747AA.5030509@pse-consulting.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Inefficient bytea escaping? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de> writes: > >>Here are the results, with the copy patch: > > >>psql \copy 1.4 GB from table, binary: >>8.0 8.1 8.2dev >>36s 34s 36s > > >>psql \copy 6.6 GB from table, std: >>8.0 8.1 8.2dev >>375s 362s 290s (second:283s) > > > Hmph. There's something strange going on on your platform (what is it > anyway?) Debian 2.6.26. > It's interesting (and surprising) that the runtime is > actually less for psql \copy than for server COPY. This is a dual Xeon > machine, maybe the frontend copy provides more scope to use both CPUs? The dual CPU explanation sounds reasonable, but I found the same tendency on a single 3GHz (HT disabled). Strange observation using top: user >90%, sys <10%, idle+wait 0% but only postmaster consumes cpu, showing 35%, the rest neglectable. > > It would be interesting to see what's happening on your machine with > oprofile or equivalent. I'll investigate further, trying to find the missing CPU. Regards, Andreas
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: