Re: GiST index performance
От | Matthew Wakeling |
---|---|
Тема | Re: GiST index performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | alpine.DEB.2.00.0904161900500.22330@aragorn.flymine.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: GiST index performance (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Tom Lane wrote: > Hmm, and what is shared_buffers set to? How big are the tables and > other indexes used in the query? We still have to explain why the > inner nestloop got slower, and it's hard to see that unless something > stopped fitting in cache. I just noticed that someone has started running a big java program (6GB RAM so far) on that machine. Maybe it was running during the bad run. I'll see if I can re-run those two queries later on when the machine is idle. shared_buffers = 500MB Location table: 336 MB Gene table: 124 MB Primer table: 103 MB location__key_all index: 334 MB Matthew -- For those of you who are into writing programs that are as obscure and complicated as possible, there are opportunities for... real fun here -- Computer Science Lecturer
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: