Re: non-WAL btree?
От | David Wilson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: non-WAL btree? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | e7f9235d0808011316r5fa30d98vfd2933e96af51c9a@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: non-WAL btree? (Alex Vinogradovs <AVinogradovs@Clearpathnet.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: non-WAL btree?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Alex Vinogradovs <AVinogradovs@clearpathnet.com> wrote: > By loading in bulks, I mean I load some 40-50 thousand > rows at once into a table that already has some millions. > Index rebuild on that table after each 50k inserts will > be even less efficient ;) How many indexes do you have on this...? I do this pretty regularly (actually, I do 4k batches with COPY, 4-10 concurrent batches every 10 seconds, for 2-3 days at a time) and, having testing dropping indices, nothing to do with the index has a particularly strong performance impact. That said, a significant increase in checkpoint segments was required to get good performance out of the above use case. If you haven't tried that, I'd say that's a good place to start. What makes you think it's specifically index WAL work, though? -- - David T. Wilson david.t.wilson@gmail.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: