diff --git "a/pgsql-performance.200303" "b/pgsql-performance.200303" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/pgsql-performance.200303" @@ -0,0 +1,18700 @@ +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 1 18:30:37 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F28D474E44 + for ; + Sat, 1 Mar 2003 18:30:35 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 48941-06 for ; + Sat, 1 Mar 2003 18:30:06 -0500 (EST) +Received: from 61.59.32.52 (unknown [61.236.232.12]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B295E474E61 + for ; + Sat, 1 Mar 2003 18:29:36 -0500 (EST) +Received: from unknown (185.176.53.24) by rly-yk05.mx.aol.com with local; + Mar, 01 2003 4:08:32 PM +1200 +Received: from [174.223.185.169] by rly-xl05.mx.aol.com with NNFMP; + Mar, 01 2003 3:33:34 PM -0100 +From: Orito +To: Elena@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: ABOUT YOUR CREDIT........... eyr +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" +Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 17:36:46 -0600 +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 +Message-Id: <20030301232936.B295E474E61@postgresql.org> +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/1 +X-Sequence-Number: 1299 + +

+

We can fix your credit. We are very successful at getting +bankruptcies, judgments, tax liens, foreclosures, late payments, charge-offs, +repossessions, and even student loans removed from a persons credit report. To find out more go to +http://www.cjlinc.net.

+

If you no longer want to receive information from us just go to +tallrhe@cs.com.

+  + +jppqcwvxbucxknjykmaickbeaprregekfrvwt + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 00:48:50 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8930C475F18 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 00:48:47 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 63151-05 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 00:48:45 -0500 (EST) +Received: from kootenai.aretesystems.com (h-66-166-23-162.SNVACAID.covad.net + [66.166.23.162]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4F8475EF7 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 00:48:45 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sinopah.home.aretesystems.com ([192.168.10.10] + helo=aretesystems.com) + by kootenai.aretesystems.com with asmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) + (Exim 4.10) id HB7MTE-000JZJ-00 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 21:48:50 -0800 +Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 21:48:49 -0800 +Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) +Content-Type: text/plain; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed +Subject: Slow performance with join on many fields +From: Alex Johnson +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Message-Id: +X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/2 +X-Sequence-Number: 1300 + +Hello- + +I'm working with a MS Access database that a client wants to turn into +a multi-user database. I'm evaluating PostgreSQL for that purpose (I'd +_really_ like to be able to recommend and open-source solution to +them). However, I'm running into a performance-related issue that I was +hoping this list could help me with. + +I have three tables: tbl_samples (~2000 rows), tbl_tests (~4000 rows), +and tbl_results (~20,000 rows), with one-to-many relationships between +them (cascading, in the order given - table definitions are attached +below). I'm looking at the following query that joins these three +tables: + +SELECT + tbl_samples.station_id, + tbl_samples.samp_date, + tbl_samples.matrix, + tbl_samples.samp_type_code, + tbl_samples.samp_no, + tbl_samples.field_samp_id, + tbl_tests.method, + tbl_tests.lab, + tbl_results.par_code, + tbl_results.val_qualifier, + tbl_results.value, + tbl_results.units, + tbl_results.mdl, + tbl_results.date_anal +FROM + (tbl_samples + INNER JOIN tbl_tests USING + (station_id, + samp_date, + matrix, + samp_type_code, + samp_no, + samp_bdepth, + samp_edepth) + ) + INNER JOIN tbl_results USING + (station_id, + samp_date, + matrix, + samp_type_code, + samp_no, + samp_bdepth, + samp_edepth, + method); + +In Access, this query runs in about a second. In PostgreSQL on the same +machine, it takes about 12-15 seconds for the initial rows to be +returned, and about 45 seconds to returns all rows. (This is consistent +whether I use psql, use the pgAdminII SQL window, or use Access with +the ODBC driver.) + +This is the output from EXPLAIN: + +Nested Loop (cost=437.73..1216.02 rows=1 width=245) + Join Filter: ("outer".method = "inner".method) + -> Merge Join (cost=437.73..461.38 rows=125 width=131) + Merge Cond: (("outer".matrix = "inner".matrix) AND +("outer".samp_edepth = "inner".samp_edepth) AND ("outer".samp_bdepth = +"inner".samp_bdepth) AND ("outer".samp_no = "inner".samp_no) AND +("outer".samp_type_code = "inner".samp_type_code) AND +("outer".samp_date = "inner".samp_date) AND ("outer".station_id = +"inner".station_id)) + -> Sort (cost=117.51..120.77 rows=1304 width=63) + Sort Key: tbl_samples.matrix, tbl_samples.samp_edepth, +tbl_samples.samp_bdepth, tbl_samples.samp_no, +tbl_samples.samp_type_code, tbl_samples.samp_date, +tbl_samples.station_id + -> Seq Scan on tbl_samples (cost=0.00..50.04 rows=1304 +width=63) + -> Sort (cost=320.22..328.68 rows=3384 width=68) + Sort Key: tbl_tests.matrix, tbl_tests.samp_edepth, +tbl_tests.samp_bdepth, tbl_tests.samp_no, tbl_tests.samp_type_code, +tbl_tests.samp_date, tbl_tests.station_id + -> Seq Scan on tbl_tests (cost=0.00..121.84 rows=3384 +width=68) + -> Index Scan using tbl_results_pkey on tbl_results +(cost=0.00..5.99 rows=1 width=114) + Index Cond: (("outer".station_id = tbl_results.station_id) AND +("outer".samp_date = tbl_results.samp_date) AND ("outer".matrix = +tbl_results.matrix) AND ("outer".samp_type_code = +tbl_results.samp_type_code) AND ("outer".samp_no = tbl_results.samp_no) +AND ("outer".samp_bdepth = tbl_results.samp_bdepth) AND +("outer".samp_edepth = tbl_results.samp_edepth)) + +I've done the following to try to improve performance: + +-postgresql.conf: + increased shared_buffers to 384 + increased sort_mem to 2048 +-clustered all tables on the pkey index +-made sure the joined fields are indexed (they are through the pkeys) + +As a note, vm_stat shows no paging while the query is run. Also, I +realize that these keys are large (as in the number of fields). I'll be +condensing these down to sequential IDs (e.g. a SERIAL type) for a +further test, but I'm curious why Access seems to outperform Postgres +in this instance. + +My question is, am I missing anything? PostgreSQL will be a hard sell +if they have to take a performance hit. + +Thanks for any suggestions you can provide. Sorry for the long e-mail, +but I wanted to provide enough info to diagnose the issue. + +Alex Johnson +________________________________ +Table defs: + +CREATE TABLE tbl_Samples ( + Station_ID VARCHAR (25) NOT NULL, + Samp_Date TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE NOT NULL, + Matrix VARCHAR (10) NOT NULL, + Samp_Type_Code VARCHAR (5) NOT NULL, + Samp_No INTEGER NOT NULL, + Samp_BDepth DOUBLE PRECISION NOT NULL, + Samp_EDepth DOUBLE PRECISION NOT NULL, + Depth_units VARCHAR (3), + Samp_start_time TIME, + Samp_end_time TIME, + Field_Samp_ID VARCHAR (20), + Lab_Samp_ID VARCHAR (20), + Samp_Meth VARCHAR (20), + ...snip... + PRIMARY KEY +(Station_ID,Samp_Date,Matrix,Samp_Type_Code,Samp_No,Samp_BDepth,Samp_EDe +pth) +); + +CREATE TABLE tbl_Tests ( + Station_ID VARCHAR (25) NOT NULL, + Samp_Date TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE NOT NULL, + Matrix VARCHAR (10) NOT NULL, + Samp_Type_Code VARCHAR (5) NOT NULL, + Samp_No INTEGER NOT NULL, + Samp_BDepth DOUBLE PRECISION NOT NULL, + Samp_EDepth DOUBLE PRECISION NOT NULL, + Method VARCHAR (50) NOT NULL, + Lab VARCHAR (10) NOT NULL, + Date_Rec TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE, +...snip... + PRIMARY KEY +(Station_ID,Samp_Date,Matrix,Samp_Type_Code,Samp_No,Samp_BDepth,Samp_EDe +pth,Method) +); + +CREATE TABLE tbl_Results ( + Station_ID VARCHAR (25) NOT NULL, + Samp_Date TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE NOT NULL, + Matrix VARCHAR (10) NOT NULL, + Samp_Type_Code VARCHAR (5) NOT NULL, + Samp_No INTEGER NOT NULL, + Samp_BDepth DOUBLE PRECISION NOT NULL, + Samp_EDepth DOUBLE PRECISION NOT NULL, + Method VARCHAR (50) NOT NULL, + Par_code VARCHAR (50) NOT NULL, + Val_Qualifier VARCHAR (50) NOT NULL, + Value DECIMAL (20,9) NOT NULL, +...snip... + PRIMARY KEY +(Station_ID,Samp_Date,Matrix,Samp_Type_Code,Samp_No,Samp_BDepth,Samp_EDe +pth,Method,Par_code) +); + +ALTER TABLE tbl_Tests ADD CONSTRAINT REL_1 FOREIGN KEY +(Station_ID,Samp_Date,Matrix,Samp_Type_Code,Samp_No,Samp_BDepth,Samp_EDe +pth) + REFERENCES tbl_Samples ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE; +ALTER TABLE tbl_Results ADD CONSTRAINT REL_2 FOREIGN KEY +(Station_ID,Samp_Date,Matrix,Samp_Type_Code,Samp_No,Samp_BDepth,Samp_EDe +pth,Method) + REFERENCES tbl_Tests ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE; + +________________________________________________________________________ +______ +A r e t e S y s t e m s +Alexander M. Johnson, P.E. + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 01:27:49 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CF5B475F28 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 01:27:48 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 78096-05 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 01:27:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0DE475F23 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 01:27:43 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h246Rgx6020976; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 01:27:42 -0500 (EST) +To: Alex Johnson +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow performance with join on many fields +In-reply-to: +References: +Comments: In-reply-to Alex Johnson + message dated "Mon, 03 Mar 2003 21:48:49 -0800" +Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 01:27:42 -0500 +Message-ID: <20975.1046759262@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/3 +X-Sequence-Number: 1301 + +Alex Johnson writes: +> I'm looking at the following query that joins these three +> tables: + +> SELECT ... +> FROM +> (tbl_samples +> INNER JOIN tbl_tests USING ... +> ) +> INNER JOIN tbl_results USING ... + +You're forcing the join order; perhaps another order is preferable? See +http://www.ca.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.3/postgres/explicit-joins.html + +> This is the output from EXPLAIN: + +EXPLAIN ANALYZE output would've been more useful (it would have shown +whether a different join order would be better, for one thing). + +> I've done the following to try to improve performance: +> increased shared_buffers to 384 + +That's on the picayune side yet. 1000 buffers or so is where you want +to be, I think. Also, have you run ANALYZE or VACUUM ANALYZE lately? + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 02:46:42 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03516475F81 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 02:46:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 12093-08 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 02:46:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: from kootenai.aretesystems.com (h-66-166-23-162.SNVACAID.covad.net + [66.166.23.162]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 540AC475FBD + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 02:46:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sinopah.home.aretesystems.com ([192.168.10.10] + helo=aretesystems.com) + by kootenai.aretesystems.com with asmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) + (Exim 4.10) id HB7S9R-000K07-00; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 23:46:39 -0800 +Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 23:46:38 -0800 +Subject: Re: Slow performance with join on many fields +Content-Type: text/plain; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed +Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +To: Tom Lane +From: Alex Johnson +In-Reply-To: <20975.1046759262@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Message-Id: <6E7231D8-4E15-11D7-85B6-000502FCE08D@aretesystems.com> +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/4 +X-Sequence-Number: 1302 + +Tom- +Thanks for the speedy reply. + +> That's on the picayune side yet. 1000 buffers or so is where you want +> to be, I think. Also, have you run ANALYZE or VACUUM ANALYZE lately? + +VACUUM ANALYSE did it.... (doh!...now I feel stupid). I had run VACUUM +and VACUUM ANALYZE from pgAdmin, yesterday. After running it from the +command line now, It's much improved (~ 2-3 secs). I'm now looking +into getting my kernel to increase the SHMAX parameter so I can bump up +the shared buffers some more. + +Thanks again for the speedy help, and sorry for the obvious goof. + +Alex Johnson +________________________________________________________________________ +______ +A r e t e S y s t e m s +Alexander Johnson, P.E. + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 09:44:50 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DD5247611E + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 09:44:49 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 01446-10 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 09:44:47 -0500 (EST) +Received: from relay.firstnet.net.uk (inbound.firstnet.net.uk + [212.103.224.21]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 99B0447611C + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 09:44:46 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 18724 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2003 14:44:35 -0000 +Received: from unknown (HELO paulspc) (62.105.89.252) + by tulyar.first with SMTP; 4 Mar 2003 14:44:35 -0000 +From: "Paul McKay" +To: +Subject: Slow query performance on large table +Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 14:45:18 -0000 +Message-ID: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C2E25C.AD51E810" +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 +Importance: Normal +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/5 +X-Sequence-Number: 1303 + +This is a multi-part message in MIME format. + +------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C2E25C.AD51E810 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit + +Hi, + + + +I am executing a query on a table: + + + + Table "public.measurement" + + Column | Type | Modifiers + +------------+-----------------------+----------- + + assessment | integer | + + time | integer | + + value | character varying(50) | + +Indexes: idx_measurement_assessment btree (assessment), + + idx_measurement_time btree ("time") + + + +The primary key of the table is a combination of assessment and time, +and there are indexes on both assessment and time. + + + +The query I am executing is + + + +Select time,value + +>From measurement + +Where assessment = ? + +And time between ? and ? + + + +This used to run like a rocket before my database got a little larger. +There are now around 15 million rows in the table and it is taking a +long time to execute queries that get a fair number of rows back (c.300) + + + +The database is 'VACUUM ANALYZED' regularly, and I've upped the shared +buffers to a significant amount. + + + +I've tried it on various machine configurations now. A dual processor +Linux/Intel Machine with 1G of Memory, (0.5G shared buffers). A single +processor Linux/Intel Machine (0.25G shared buffers) , and a Solaris +machine (0.25G shared buffers). I'm getting similar performance on all +of them. + + + +Anybody see anything I've obviously done wrong? Any ways of improving +the performance of this query? + + + +Thanks in advance. + + + +Paul McKay. + + + + + +====================================== + +Paul Mckay + +Consultant Partner + +Servicing Division + +Clearwater-IT + +e:paul_mckay@clearwater-it.co.uk + +t:0161 877 6090 + +m: 07713 510946 + +====================================== + + + + +------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C2E25C.AD51E810 +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

+ +

Hi,

+ +

 

+ +

I am executing a query on a table:

+ +

 

+ +

         &n= +bsp; +Table "public.measurement"

+ +

   Column   +|         +Type          | Modifiers

+ +

------------+-----------------------+-----------<= +/font>

+ +

 assessment | +integer           &n= +bsp;   +|

+ +

 time       | +integer           &n= +bsp;   +|

+ +

 value      | character +varying(50) |

+ +

Indexes: idx_measurement_assessment btree (assessment),<= +/span>

+ +

         idx_mea= +surement_time +btree ("time")

+ +

 

+ +

The primary key of the table is a combination of assessm= +ent +and time, and there are indexes on both assessment and time.<= +/p> + +

 

+ +

The query I am executing is

+ +

 

+ +

Select time,value

+ +

From measurement

+ +

Where assessment =3D ?

+ +

And time between ? and ?

+ +

 

+ +

This used to run like a rocket before my database got a +little larger.  There are now around 15 million rows in the table and = +it +is taking a long time to execute queries that get a fair number of rows back +(c.300)

+ +

 

+ +

The database is  ‘VACUUM ANALYZED’ regu= +larly, +and I’ve upped the shared buffers to a significant amount.

+ +

 

+ +

I’ve tried it on various machine configurations no= +w. A +dual processor Linux/Intel Machine with 1G of Memory, (0.5G shared +buffers).  A single processor Linux/Intel Machine (0.25G shared buffer= +s) , +and a Solaris machine (0.25G shared buffers).  I’m getting simil= +ar +performance on all of them.

+ +

 

+ +

Anybody see anything I’ve obviously done wrong?&nb= +sp; Any +ways of improving the performance of this query?

+ +

 

+ +

Thanks in advance.

+ +

 

+ +

Paul McKay.

+ +

 

+ +

 

+ +

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D<= +/p> + +

Paul Mckay

+ +

Consultant Partner

+ +

Servicing Division

+ +

Clearwater-IT

+ +

e:paul_mckay@clearwater-it.co.u= +k

+ +

t:0161 877 6090

+ +

m: 07713 510946

+ +

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D<= +/p> + +

 

+ +
+ + + + + +------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C2E25C.AD51E810-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 10:09:51 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15934476149 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:09:50 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 06483-08 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:09:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: from serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (serwer.skawsoft.com.pl [213.25.37.66]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 320D7475DBD + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:09:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: from klaster.net (pc139.krakow.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl [213.76.38.139]) + by serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 5C1C02B896; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 16:07:47 +0100 (CET) +Message-ID: <3E64C1BF.4080704@klaster.net> +Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 16:09:51 +0100 +From: Tomasz Myrta +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; PL; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 +X-Accept-Language: pl, en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Paul McKay +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +References: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/6 +X-Sequence-Number: 1304 + +Paul McKay wrote: +> Hi, +> +> +> +> I am executing a query on a table: +> +> +> +> Table "public.measurement" +> +> Column | Type | Modifiers +> +> ------------+-----------------------+----------- +> +> assessment | integer | +> +> time | integer | +> +> value | character varying(50) | +> +> Indexes: idx_measurement_assessment btree (assessment), +> +> idx_measurement_time btree ("time") +> +> +> +> The primary key of the table is a combination of assessment and time, +> and there are indexes on both assessment and time. +> +> +> +> The query I am executing is +> +> +> +> Select time,value +> +> From measurement +> +> Where assessment = ? +> +> And time between ? and ? +Changing 2 indexes into one both-fields index should improve +performance much. + +create index ind_meas on measurement (assessment,time). + +Regards, +Tomasz Myrta + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 10:13:01 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B3DA47611E + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:13:00 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 06483-10 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:12:58 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65BA2475DBD + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:12:58 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h24FD1x6023082; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:13:01 -0500 (EST) +To: "Paul McKay" +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +In-reply-to: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +References: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +Comments: In-reply-to "Paul McKay" + message dated "Tue, 04 Mar 2003 14:45:18 +0000" +Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 10:13:01 -0500 +Message-ID: <23081.1046790781@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/7 +X-Sequence-Number: 1305 + +"Paul McKay" writes: +> The query I am executing is +> Select time,value +> From measurement +> Where assessment = ? +> And time between ? and ? + +EXPLAIN ANALYZE would help you investigate this. Is it using an +indexscan? On which index? Does forcing use of the other index +(by temporarily dropping the preferred one) improve matters? + +Possibly a two-column index on both assessment and time would be +an improvement, but it's hard to guess without knowing anything +about the selectivity of the two WHERE clauses. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 10:15:30 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0ED0476176 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:15:29 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 06985-10 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:15:25 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail.libertyrms.com (unknown [209.167.124.227]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E999A476170 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:15:24 -0500 (EST) +Received: from andrew by mail.libertyrms.com with local (Exim 3.22 #3 + (Debian)) + id 18qE8f-0000BO-00 + for ; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 10:15:29 -0500 +Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:15:29 -0500 +From: Andrew Sullivan +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +Message-ID: <20030304101529.D32416@mail.libertyrms.com> +Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +References: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i +In-Reply-To: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc>; + from paul_mckay@clearwater-it.co.uk on Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at + 02:45:18PM -0000 +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/8 +X-Sequence-Number: 1306 + +On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 02:45:18PM -0000, Paul McKay wrote: +> +> Select time,value +> +> >From measurement +> +> Where assessment = ? +> +> And time between ? and ? +> + +Please run this with EXPLAIN ANALYSE with values that slow the query +down. By bet is that you have an index which needs wider statistics +setting on the column to be useful, but without the output from +EXAPLIN ANALYSE it'll be hard to tell. + +A + +-- +---- +Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street +Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada + M2P 2A8 + +1 416 646 3304 x110 + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 11:10:48 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D84DC476130 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:10:45 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 20395-06 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:10:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: from relay.firstnet.net.uk (inbound.firstnet.net.uk + [212.103.224.21]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A415475ED1 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:10:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 23261 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2003 16:10:37 -0000 +Received: from unknown (HELO paulspc) (62.105.89.252) + by meld.first with SMTP; 4 Mar 2003 16:10:37 -0000 +From: "Paul McKay" +To: "'Tom Lane'" +Cc: +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 16:11:20 -0000 +Message-ID: <000001c2e268$b1e47210$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 +Importance: Normal +In-Reply-To: <23081.1046790781@sss.pgh.pa.us> +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/9 +X-Sequence-Number: 1307 + +The results were + +clearview=# explain analyse +clearview-# select assessment,time +clearview-# from measurement +clearview-# where assessment = 53661 +clearview-# and time between 1046184261 and 1046335461; + +NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: + +Index Scan using idx_measurement_assessment on measurement +(cost=0.00..34668.61 rows=261 width=8) (actual time=26128.07..220584.69 +rows=503 loops=1) +Total runtime: 220587.06 msec + +EXPLAIN + +After adding the index kindly suggested by yourself and Tomasz I get, + +clearview=# explain analyse +clearview-# select assessment,time +clearview-# from measurement +clearview-# where assessment = 53661 +clearview-# and time between 1046184261 and 1046335461; +NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: + +Index Scan using ind_measurement_ass_time on measurement +(cost=0.00..1026.92 rows=261 width=8) (actual time=15.37..350.46 +rows=503 loops=1) +Total runtime: 350.82 msec + +EXPLAIN + + +I vaguely recall doing a bit of a reorganize on this database a bit back +and it looks like I lost the primary Key index. No wonder it was going +slow. + +Thanks a lot for your help. + +Paul Mckay. + +====================================== +Paul Mckay +Consultant Partner +Servicing Division +Clearwater-IT +e:paul_mckay@clearwater-it.co.uk +t:0161 877 6090 +m: 07713 510946 +====================================== + +-----Original Message----- +From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us] +Sent: 04 March 2003 15:13 +To: Paul McKay +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow query performance on large table + +"Paul McKay" writes: +> The query I am executing is +> Select time,value +> From measurement +> Where assessment = ? +> And time between ? and ? + +EXPLAIN ANALYZE would help you investigate this. Is it using an +indexscan? On which index? Does forcing use of the other index +(by temporarily dropping the preferred one) improve matters? + +Possibly a two-column index on both assessment and time would be +an improvement, but it's hard to guess without knowing anything +about the selectivity of the two WHERE clauses. + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 11:38:41 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21801476154 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:38:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 29649-05 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:38:37 -0500 (EST) +Received: from smtp.web.de (smtp02.web.de [217.72.192.151]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E457475ED1 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:38:37 -0500 (EST) +Received: from p508186ad.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([80.129.134.173] helo=web.de) + by smtp.web.de with asmtp (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (WEB.DE(Exim) 4.97 #53) + id 18qFRA-0002Xu-00 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 17:38:40 +0100 +Message-ID: <3E64D694.9050309@web.de> +Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 17:38:44 +0100 +From: Andreas Pflug +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +References: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc> + <23081.1046790781@sss.pgh.pa.us> +In-Reply-To: <23081.1046790781@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/10 +X-Sequence-Number: 1308 + +Tom Lane wrote: + +>"Paul McKay" writes: +> +> +>>The query I am executing is +>>Select time,value +>>From measurement +>>Where assessment = ? +>>And time between ? and ? +>> +>> +> +>EXPLAIN ANALYZE would help you investigate this. Is it using an +>indexscan? On which index? Does forcing use of the other index +>(by temporarily dropping the preferred one) improve matters? +> +>Possibly a two-column index on both assessment and time would be +>an improvement, but it's hard to guess without knowing anything +>about the selectivity of the two WHERE clauses. +> +> regards, tom lane +> +>---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> +> + +Tom, + +does this mean that a primary key alone might not be enough? As far as I +understood Paul, the PK looks quite as the newly created index does, so +"create index ind_meas on measurement (assessment,time)" should perform +the same as "... primary key(assessment,time)". +Do possibly non-optimal indices (only assessment, only time as Paul +described earlier) screw up the optimizer, igoring the better option +usiing the PK? Obviously, the index used should be combined of +(assessment,time) but IMHO a PK should be enough. + +regards, + +Andreas + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 12:02:41 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CFF947619B + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:02:40 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 36044-05 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:02:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [65.217.53.66]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F8F476154 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:02:37 -0500 (EST) +Received: from thorn.mmrd.com (thorn.mmrd.com [172.25.10.100]) + by localhost.localdomain (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h24HWV6P023850; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:32:33 -0500 +Received: from gnvex001.mmrd.com (gnvex001.mmrd.com [192.168.3.55]) + by thorn.mmrd.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h24H2Up03967; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:02:31 -0500 +Received: from camel.mmrd.com ([172.25.5.213]) by gnvex001.mmrd.com with SMTP + (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) + id F3HTH0NK; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:02:29 -0500 +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +From: Robert Treat +To: Paul McKay +Cc: "'Tom Lane'" , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +In-Reply-To: <000001c2e268$b1e47210$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +References: <000001c2e268$b1e47210$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 +Date: 04 Mar 2003 12:02:29 -0500 +Message-Id: <1046797349.16957.20.camel@camel> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/11 +X-Sequence-Number: 1309 + +On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 11:11, Paul McKay wrote: +> The results were +> +> clearview=# explain analyse +> clearview-# select assessment,time +> clearview-# from measurement +> clearview-# where assessment = 53661 +> clearview-# and time between 1046184261 and 1046335461; +> +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Index Scan using idx_measurement_assessment on measurement +> (cost=0.00..34668.61 rows=261 width=8) (actual time=26128.07..220584.69 +> rows=503 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 220587.06 msec +> +> EXPLAIN +> +> After adding the index kindly suggested by yourself and Tomasz I get, +> +> clearview=# explain analyse +> clearview-# select assessment,time +> clearview-# from measurement +> clearview-# where assessment = 53661 +> clearview-# and time between 1046184261 and 1046335461; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Index Scan using ind_measurement_ass_time on measurement +> (cost=0.00..1026.92 rows=261 width=8) (actual time=15.37..350.46 +> rows=503 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 350.82 msec +> +> EXPLAIN +> +> +> I vaguely recall doing a bit of a reorganize on this database a bit back +> and it looks like I lost the primary Key index. No wonder it was going +> slow. +> + +Maybe it's just me, but I get the feeling you need to work some regular +reindexing into your maintenance schedule. Given your query is using +between, I don't think it would use the index on the time field anyway +(and explain analyze seems to be supporting this). Rewrite it so that +you have a and time > foo and time < bar and I think you'll see a +difference. With that in mind, I think your speedier query results are +due more to having a non-bloated index freshly created than the fact +that it being a dual column index. + +Robert Treat + + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 12:15:28 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E091B476228 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:15:25 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 36450-08 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:15:24 -0500 (EST) +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B372476224 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:15:24 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2879411; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 09:15:13 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: "Paul McKay" , + "'Tom Lane'" +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 09:14:44 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +Cc: +References: <000001c2e268$b1e47210$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +In-Reply-To: <000001c2e268$b1e47210$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Message-Id: <200303040914.44390.josh@agliodbs.com> +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/12 +X-Sequence-Number: 1310 + +Paul, + +> Index Scan using idx_measurement_assessment on measurement +> (cost=3D0.00..34668.61 rows=3D261 width=3D8) (actual time=3D26128.07..220= +584.69 +> rows=3D503 loops=3D1) +> Total runtime: 220587.06 msec + +These query results say to me that you need to do both a VACUUM FULL and a= +=20 +REINDEX on this table. The 26-second delay before returning the first row= +=20 +says "table/index with lots of dead pages" to me. + +For the future, you should consider dramatically increasing your FSM settin= +gs=20 +and working a regular VACUUM FULL and REINDEX into your maintainence jobs. + +--=20 +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 12:18:25 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F4D74761D8 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:18:24 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 38166-09 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:18:19 -0500 (EST) +Received: from relay.firstnet.net.uk (inbound.firstnet.net.uk + [212.103.224.21]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1A66B4761C4 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:18:19 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 2563 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2003 17:18:20 -0000 +Received: from unknown (HELO paulspc) (62.105.89.252) + by meld.first with SMTP; 4 Mar 2003 17:18:20 -0000 +From: "Paul McKay" +To: "'Robert Treat'" +Cc: "'Tom Lane'" , + +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 17:19:03 -0000 +Message-ID: <000601c2e272$27985900$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 +Importance: Normal +In-Reply-To: <1046797349.16957.20.camel@camel> +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/13 +X-Sequence-Number: 1311 + +I used the between .. and in a vain attempt to improve performance! +Running with < and > improves the performance again by about 10 times. + +The explain's below were ran on a test server I was using (not the live +server) where I had recreated the database in order to investigate +matters, so all the indexes were newly created anyway. The dual column +index was the key (literally). + + +====================================== +Paul Mckay +Consultant Partner +Servicing Division +Clearwater-IT +e:paul_mckay@clearwater-it.co.uk +t:0161 877 6090 +m: 07713 510946 +====================================== + +-----Original Message----- +From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org +[mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Robert +Treat +Sent: 04 March 2003 17:02 +To: Paul McKay +Cc: 'Tom Lane'; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow query performance on large table + +On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 11:11, Paul McKay wrote: +> The results were +> +> clearview=# explain analyse +> clearview-# select assessment,time +> clearview-# from measurement +> clearview-# where assessment = 53661 +> clearview-# and time between 1046184261 and 1046335461; +> +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Index Scan using idx_measurement_assessment on measurement +> (cost=0.00..34668.61 rows=261 width=8) (actual +time=26128.07..220584.69 +> rows=503 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 220587.06 msec +> +> EXPLAIN +> +> After adding the index kindly suggested by yourself and Tomasz I get, +> +> clearview=# explain analyse +> clearview-# select assessment,time +> clearview-# from measurement +> clearview-# where assessment = 53661 +> clearview-# and time between 1046184261 and 1046335461; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Index Scan using ind_measurement_ass_time on measurement +> (cost=0.00..1026.92 rows=261 width=8) (actual time=15.37..350.46 +> rows=503 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 350.82 msec +> +> EXPLAIN +> +> +> I vaguely recall doing a bit of a reorganize on this database a bit +back +> and it looks like I lost the primary Key index. No wonder it was going +> slow. +> + +Maybe it's just me, but I get the feeling you need to work some regular +reindexing into your maintenance schedule. Given your query is using +between, I don't think it would use the index on the time field anyway +(and explain analyze seems to be supporting this). Rewrite it so that +you have a and time > foo and time < bar and I think you'll see a +difference. With that in mind, I think your speedier query results are +due more to having a non-bloated index freshly created than the fact +that it being a dual column index. + +Robert Treat + + + + +---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command + (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 12:20:31 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D108B4761AD + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:20:29 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 40204-07 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:20:27 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4CAE476224 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:20:22 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h24HKQx6025726; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:20:26 -0500 (EST) +To: Robert Treat +Cc: Paul McKay , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +In-reply-to: <1046797349.16957.20.camel@camel> +References: <000001c2e268$b1e47210$0c64a8c0@paulspc> + <1046797349.16957.20.camel@camel> +Comments: In-reply-to Robert Treat + message dated "04 Mar 2003 12:02:29 -0500" +Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 12:20:26 -0500 +Message-ID: <25725.1046798426@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/14 +X-Sequence-Number: 1312 + +Robert Treat writes: +> Maybe it's just me, but I get the feeling you need to work some regular +> reindexing into your maintenance schedule. + +Or at least, more vacuuming... + +> Given your query is using +> between, I don't think it would use the index on the time field anyway +> (and explain analyze seems to be supporting this). Rewrite it so that +> you have a and time > foo and time < bar and I think you'll see a +> difference. + +No, you won't, because that's exactly what BETWEEN is. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 12:20:46 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB081476245 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:20:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 40606-07 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:20:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: from serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (serwer.skawsoft.com.pl [213.25.37.66]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E542476243 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:20:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: from klaster.net (pa160.krakow.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl [213.76.36.160]) + by serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 41A892B88F; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:18:52 +0100 (CET) +Message-ID: <3E64E079.8050807@klaster.net> +Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 18:20:57 +0100 +From: Tomasz Myrta +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; PL; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 +X-Accept-Language: pl, en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Andreas Pflug +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +References: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc> + <23081.1046790781@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3E64D694.9050309@web.de> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/15 +X-Sequence-Number: 1313 + +Andreas Pflug wrote: + +> Tom, +> +> does this mean that a primary key alone might not be enough? As far as I +> understood Paul, the PK looks quite as the newly created index does, so +> "create index ind_meas on measurement (assessment,time)" should perform +> the same as "... primary key(assessment,time)". +> Do possibly non-optimal indices (only assessment, only time as Paul +> described earlier) screw up the optimizer, igoring the better option +> usiing the PK? Obviously, the index used should be combined of +> (assessment,time) but IMHO a PK should be enough. +> +> regards, +> +> Andreas +You are right - primary key should be ok, but Paul lost it. psql \d +shows primary key indexes, but in this case there was no such primary key. + +Regards, +Tomasz Myrta + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 12:30:33 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2785647629F + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:30:32 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 44002-07 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:30:27 -0500 (EST) +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32B5A476291 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:30:09 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2879453; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 09:29:58 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: michael@linuxmagic.com +Subject: PostgreSQL Performance Issue on Mail Server +Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 09:29:28 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Message-Id: <200303040929.28743.josh@agliodbs.com> +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/17 +X-Sequence-Number: 1315 + +Mr. Peddermors, + +"We have a postgres backend to our Mail Server product, and encountering=20 +performance issues. Simple selects are taking 7-10 seconds..=20 +We have of course applied all the suggested performance settings for Postgr= +es,=20 +(We are running on Debian Stable/Linux BTW) +We moved the database to a standalone server, but still having the problems. +With app 100,000 users authenticating pop mail, plus all of the smtp=20 +verfications, the server is expected to perform snappy queries, else mail= +=20 +delivery/pickup is inordintaely long, or can't occur, and loads snowball.." + +I've cc'd your question to PGSQL-Performance list. Can you give us a f= +ew=20 +examples of EXPLAIN ANALYZE output for the queries which are running slow?= +=20 +(as well as the queries themeselves)? It's possible that you have a=20 +platform issue on Debian, but far more likely that this is a garden-variety= +=20 +performance tuning issue. + +If this is a business-critical issue, I suggest that you retain a PostgreSQ= +L=20 +consultant, such as PostgreSQL Inc., myself, or Justin Clift. + +--=20 +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 12:29:14 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 404FC47625C + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:29:13 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 43465-04 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:29:11 -0500 (EST) +Received: from serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (serwer.skawsoft.com.pl [213.25.37.66]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FF0C47624C + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:29:11 -0500 (EST) +Received: from klaster.net (pa160.krakow.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl [213.76.36.160]) + by serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 774252B88F; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:27:29 +0100 (CET) +Message-ID: <3E64E27A.3050708@klaster.net> +Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 18:29:30 +0100 +From: Tomasz Myrta +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; PL; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 +X-Accept-Language: pl, en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Robert Treat +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +References: <000001c2e268$b1e47210$0c64a8c0@paulspc> + <1046797349.16957.20.camel@camel> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/16 +X-Sequence-Number: 1314 + +Robert Treat wrote: + +> Maybe it's just me, but I get the feeling you need to work some regular +> reindexing into your maintenance schedule. Given your query is using +> between, I don't think it would use the index on the time field anyway +> (and explain analyze seems to be supporting this). Rewrite it so that +> you have a and time > foo and time < bar and I think you'll see a +> difference. With that in mind, I think your speedier query results are +> due more to having a non-bloated index freshly created than the fact +> that it being a dual column index. +> +> Robert Treat +Do you know anything about between, what should we know? +I made some tests, and there was no noticable difference between them: + +pvwatch=# EXPLAIN analyze * from stats where hostid=1 and stp between 1 +and 2; + QUERY PLAN + +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + Index Scan using ind_stats on stats (cost=0.00..6.01 rows=1 width=28) +(actual time=0.00..0.00 rows=0 loops=1) + Index Cond: ((hostid = 1) AND (stp >= 1) AND (stp <= 2)) + Total runtime: 0.00 msec +(3 rows) + +pvwatch=# EXPLAIN analyze SELECT * from stats where hostid=1 and stp> 1 +and stp<2; + QUERY PLAN + +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + Index Scan using ind_stats on stats (cost=0.00..6.01 rows=1 width=28) +(actual time=0.00..0.00 rows=0 loops=1) + Index Cond: ((hostid = 1) AND (stp > 1) AND (stp < 2)) + Total runtime: 0.00 msec +(3 rows) + + +Regards, +Tomasz Myrta + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 4 12:53:14 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14443476262 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:53:13 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 52076-04 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:53:11 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642AB476228 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:53:08 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h24HrDx6027570; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:53:13 -0500 (EST) +To: Andreas Pflug +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +In-reply-to: <3E64D694.9050309@web.de> +References: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc> + <23081.1046790781@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3E64D694.9050309@web.de> +Comments: In-reply-to Andreas Pflug + message dated "Tue, 04 Mar 2003 17:38:44 +0100" +Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 12:53:13 -0500 +Message-ID: <27569.1046800393@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/18 +X-Sequence-Number: 1316 + +Andreas Pflug writes: +> "create index ind_meas on measurement (assessment,time)" should perform +> the same as "... primary key(assessment,time)". + +Sure. + +> Do possibly non-optimal indices (only assessment, only time as Paul +> described earlier) screw up the optimizer, igoring the better option +> usiing the PK? + +One would like to think the optimizer will make the right choice. But +using a two-column index just because it's there isn't necessarily the +right choice. The two-column index will certainly be bulkier and more +expensive to scan, so if there's a one-column index that's nearly as +selective, it might be a better choice. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 01:34:33 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5212488412 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 23:45:49 -0500 (EST) +Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8]) + by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with + SMTP id 72029-02 for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 23:45:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: from smtp.web.de (smtp03.web.de [217.72.192.158]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CCE34C9DF5 + for ; + Tue, 4 Mar 2003 16:45:30 -0500 (EST) +Received: from p508187e9.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([80.129.135.233] helo=web.de) + by smtp.web.de with asmtp (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (WEB.DE(Exim) 4.97 #53) + id 18qKE6-0004DD-00 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 22:45:31 +0100 +Message-ID: <3E651E80.9070807@web.de> +Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 22:45:36 +0100 +From: Andreas Pflug +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +References: <000001c2e25c$ad506170$0c64a8c0@paulspc> + <23081.1046790781@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3E64D694.9050309@web.de> + <3E64E079.8050807@klaster.net> +In-Reply-To: <3E64E079.8050807@klaster.net> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new +X-Archive-Number: 200303/19 +X-Sequence-Number: 1317 + +Tomasz Myrta wrote: + +> You are right - primary key should be ok, but Paul lost it. psql \d +> shows primary key indexes, but in this case there was no such primary +> key. +> +> Regards, +> Tomasz Myrta +> +Ok, + +then my view of the world is all right again. + +Re Tom Lane + +> One would like to think the optimizer will make the right choice. But +> using a two-column index just because it's there isn't necessarily the +> right choice. The two-column index will certainly be bulkier and more +> expensive to scan, so if there's a one-column index that's nearly as +> selective, it might be a better choice. + + +If I know that the access pattern of my app looks as if it will need a +multipart index I should create it. If the optimizer finds out, a +simpler one will fit better, all right, it knows better (if properly +VACUUMed :-). But it's still good practice to offer complete indices. +Will pgsql use a multipart index as efficiently for simpler queries as a +shorter one covering only the first columns? In this example, the +(assessment, time) index could replace the (accessment) index, but +certainly not the (time) index. I tend to design longer indices with +hopefully valuable columns. + +In this context: + From MSSQL, I know "covering indices". Imagine a table t with many +columns, and an index on (a,b,c). +in MSSQL, SELECT c from t where (a ... AND b...) will use that index to +retrieve the c column value also without touching the row data. In a +sense, the index is used as an alternative table. Does pgsql profit from +this kind of indices also? + +Regards, + +Andreas + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 04:49:58 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from relay.firstnet.net.uk (inbound.firstnet.net.uk + [212.103.224.21]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 37FC4476510 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 04:47:16 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 21917 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2003 09:47:11 -0000 +Received: from unknown (HELO paulspc) (62.105.89.252) + by meld.first with SMTP; 5 Mar 2003 09:47:11 -0000 +From: "Paul McKay" +To: +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:47:51 -0000 +Message-ID: <000001c2e2fc$4a13c200$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 +Importance: Normal +In-Reply-To: <3E64E079.8050807@klaster.net> +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/20 +X-Sequence-Number: 1318 + + +Hopefully you guys can help me with another query I've got that's +running slow. + +This time it's across two tables I have + +clearview=# \d panconversation + Table "panconversation" + Column | Type | Modifiers +-------------+---------+----------- + assessment | integer | not null + interface | integer | + source | integer | + destination | integer | + protocol | integer | +Indexes: idx_panconversation_destination, + idx_panconversation_interface, + idx_panconversation_protocol, + idx_panconversation_source +Primary key: panconversation_pkey +Unique keys: unq_panconversation +Triggers: RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186648, + RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186654, + RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186660, + RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186666 + +Primary key is assessment + +Along with the table I was dealing with before, with the index I'd +mislaid put back in + +clearview=# \d measurement + Table "measurement" + Column | Type | Modifiers +------------+-----------------------+----------- + assessment | integer | + time | integer | + value | character varying(50) | +Indexes: idx_measurement_assessment, + idx_measurement_time, + ind_measurement_ass_time + +The 'explain analyse' of the query I am running is rather evil. + +clearview=# explain analyse select source,value +clearview-# from measurement, PANConversation +clearview-# where PANConversation.assessment = +measurement.assessment +clearview-# and Interface = 11 +clearview-# and Time > 1046184261 and Time < 1046335461 +clearview-# ; +NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: + +Hash Join (cost=1532.83..345460.73 rows=75115 width=23) (actual +time=1769.84..66687.11 rows=16094 loops=1) + -> Seq Scan on measurement (cost=0.00..336706.07 rows=418859 +width=15) (actual time=1280.11..59985.47 rows=455788 loops=1) + -> Hash (cost=1498.21..1498.21 rows=13848 width=8) (actual +time=253.49..253.49 rows=0 loops=1) + -> Seq Scan on panconversation (cost=0.00..1498.21 rows=13848 +width=8) (actual time=15.64..223.18 rows=13475 loops=1) +Total runtime: 66694.82 msec + +EXPLAIN + +Anybody shed any light on why the indexes I created aren't being used, +and I have these nasty sequential scans? + +Thanks in advance, + +Paul. +====================================== +Paul Mckay +Consultant Partner +Servicing Division +Clearwater-IT +e:paul_mckay@clearwater-it.co.uk +t:0161 877 6090 +m: 07713 510946 +====================================== + +-----Original Message----- +From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org +[mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tomasz +Myrta +Sent: 04 March 2003 17:21 +To: Andreas Pflug +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow query performance on large table + +Andreas Pflug wrote: + +> Tom, +> +> does this mean that a primary key alone might not be enough? As far as +I +> understood Paul, the PK looks quite as the newly created index does, +so +> "create index ind_meas on measurement (assessment,time)" should +perform +> the same as "... primary key(assessment,time)". +> Do possibly non-optimal indices (only assessment, only time as Paul +> described earlier) screw up the optimizer, igoring the better option +> usiing the PK? Obviously, the index used should be combined of +> (assessment,time) but IMHO a PK should be enough. +> +> regards, +> +> Andreas +You are right - primary key should be ok, but Paul lost it. psql \d +shows primary key indexes, but in this case there was no such primary +key. + +Regards, +Tomasz Myrta + + +---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? + +http://archives.postgresql.org + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 05:04:30 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (serwer.skawsoft.com.pl [213.25.37.66]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6657147682D + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 05:04:28 -0500 (EST) +Received: from klaster.net (pi106.krakow.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl [217.99.209.106]) + by serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP + id EC05E2B88F; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:02:30 +0100 (CET) +Message-ID: <3E65CBBE.4090803@klaster.net> +Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 11:04:46 +0100 +From: Tomasz Myrta +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; PL; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 +X-Accept-Language: pl, en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Paul McKay +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +References: <000001c2e2fc$4a13c200$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/21 +X-Sequence-Number: 1319 + +Paul McKay wrote: +> Hopefully you guys can help me with another query I've got that's +> running slow. +> +> This time it's across two tables I have +> +> clearview=# \d panconversation +> Table "panconversation" +> Column | Type | Modifiers +> -------------+---------+----------- +> assessment | integer | not null +> interface | integer | +> source | integer | +> destination | integer | +> protocol | integer | +> Indexes: idx_panconversation_destination, +> idx_panconversation_interface, +> idx_panconversation_protocol, +> idx_panconversation_source +> Primary key: panconversation_pkey +> Unique keys: unq_panconversation +> Triggers: RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186648, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186654, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186660, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186666 +> +> Primary key is assessment +> +> Along with the table I was dealing with before, with the index I'd +> mislaid put back in +> +> clearview=# \d measurement +> Table "measurement" +> Column | Type | Modifiers +> ------------+-----------------------+----------- +> assessment | integer | +> time | integer | +> value | character varying(50) | +> Indexes: idx_measurement_assessment, +> idx_measurement_time, +> ind_measurement_ass_time +> +> The 'explain analyse' of the query I am running is rather evil. +> +> clearview=# explain analyse select source,value +> clearview-# from measurement, PANConversation +> clearview-# where PANConversation.assessment = +> measurement.assessment +> clearview-# and Interface = 11 +> clearview-# and Time > 1046184261 and Time < 1046335461 +> clearview-# ; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Hash Join (cost=1532.83..345460.73 rows=75115 width=23) (actual +> time=1769.84..66687.11 rows=16094 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on measurement (cost=0.00..336706.07 rows=418859 +> width=15) (actual time=1280.11..59985.47 rows=455788 loops=1) +> -> Hash (cost=1498.21..1498.21 rows=13848 width=8) (actual +> time=253.49..253.49 rows=0 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on panconversation (cost=0.00..1498.21 rows=13848 +> width=8) (actual time=15.64..223.18 rows=13475 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 66694.82 msec +> +> EXPLAIN +> +> Anybody shed any light on why the indexes I created aren't being used, +> and I have these nasty sequential scans? + +Measurement is sequentially scaned, because probably "interface=12" +results in lot of records. + +Please, check how many rows you have +- all rows in measurement/panconversation, +- rows in measurement with "Interface"=12 +- rows in panconversation between your time. + +Regards, +Tomasz Myrta + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 05:26:43 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from relay.firstnet.net.uk (inbound.firstnet.net.uk + [212.103.224.21]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6CA61477501 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 05:26:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 26997 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2003 10:26:47 -0000 +Received: from unknown (HELO paulspc) (62.105.89.252) + by meld.first with SMTP; 5 Mar 2003 10:26:47 -0000 +From: "Paul McKay" +To: "'Tomasz Myrta'" +Cc: +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:27:27 -0000 +Message-ID: <000201c2e301$d1cc3a10$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 +Importance: Normal +In-Reply-To: <3E65CBBE.4090803@klaster.net> +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/22 +X-Sequence-Number: 1320 + + + +clearview=# select count(*) from measurement; + count +---------- + 15302138 +(1 row) + +clearview=# select count(*) from panconversation; + count +------- + 77217 +(1 row) + +clearview=# select count(*) from panconversation where interface = 11; + count +------- + 13475 +(1 row) + +clearview=# select count(*) from measurement where time > 1046184261 and +time < 1046335461; + count +-------- + 455788 +(1 row) + +====================================== +Paul Mckay +Consultant Partner +Servicing Division +Clearwater-IT +e:paul_mckay@clearwater-it.co.uk +t:0161 877 6090 +m: 07713 510946 +====================================== + +-----Original Message----- +From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org +[mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tomasz +Myrta +Sent: 05 March 2003 10:05 +To: Paul McKay +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow query performance on large table + +Paul McKay wrote: +> Hopefully you guys can help me with another query I've got that's +> running slow. +> +> This time it's across two tables I have +> +> clearview=# \d panconversation +> Table "panconversation" +> Column | Type | Modifiers +> -------------+---------+----------- +> assessment | integer | not null +> interface | integer | +> source | integer | +> destination | integer | +> protocol | integer | +> Indexes: idx_panconversation_destination, +> idx_panconversation_interface, +> idx_panconversation_protocol, +> idx_panconversation_source +> Primary key: panconversation_pkey +> Unique keys: unq_panconversation +> Triggers: RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186648, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186654, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186660, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_52186666 +> +> Primary key is assessment +> +> Along with the table I was dealing with before, with the index I'd +> mislaid put back in +> +> clearview=# \d measurement +> Table "measurement" +> Column | Type | Modifiers +> ------------+-----------------------+----------- +> assessment | integer | +> time | integer | +> value | character varying(50) | +> Indexes: idx_measurement_assessment, +> idx_measurement_time, +> ind_measurement_ass_time +> +> The 'explain analyse' of the query I am running is rather evil. +> +> clearview=# explain analyse select source,value +> clearview-# from measurement, PANConversation +> clearview-# where PANConversation.assessment = +> measurement.assessment +> clearview-# and Interface = 11 +> clearview-# and Time > 1046184261 and Time < 1046335461 +> clearview-# ; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Hash Join (cost=1532.83..345460.73 rows=75115 width=23) (actual +> time=1769.84..66687.11 rows=16094 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on measurement (cost=0.00..336706.07 rows=418859 +> width=15) (actual time=1280.11..59985.47 rows=455788 loops=1) +> -> Hash (cost=1498.21..1498.21 rows=13848 width=8) (actual +> time=253.49..253.49 rows=0 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on panconversation (cost=0.00..1498.21 +rows=13848 +> width=8) (actual time=15.64..223.18 rows=13475 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 66694.82 msec +> +> EXPLAIN +> +> Anybody shed any light on why the indexes I created aren't being used, +> and I have these nasty sequential scans? + +Measurement is sequentially scaned, because probably "interface=12" +results in lot of records. + +Please, check how many rows you have +- all rows in measurement/panconversation, +- rows in measurement with "Interface"=12 +- rows in panconversation between your time. + +Regards, +Tomasz Myrta + + + +---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 06:14:08 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from anchor-post-30.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-30.mail.demon.net + [194.217.242.88]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F1CB477330 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 06:14:05 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mwynhau.demon.co.uk ([193.237.186.96] + helo=mainbox.archonet.com) + by anchor-post-30.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) + id 18qWqd-0004TV-0U + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 11:14:07 +0000 +Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73AC71756C + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:14:06 +0000 (GMT) +Received: from client.archonet.com (client.archonet.com [192.168.1.16]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2E4D161D7 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:14:05 +0000 (GMT) +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +From: Richard Huxton +Organization: Archonet Ltd +To: +Subject: Planner matching constants across tables in a join +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:13:14 +0000 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303051113.14320.dev@archonet.com> +X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020531 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/23 +X-Sequence-Number: 1321 + +I know this has been covered on one of the lists in the past, but I'm damne= +d=20 +if I can find the keywords to locate it. + +If I join two tables with a comparison to a constant on one, why can't the= +=20 +planner see that the comparison applies to both tables: + +SELECT a.id FROM a JOIN b ON a.id=3Db.id WHERE a.id=3D1; + +runs much slower than + +SELECT a.id FROM a JOIN b ON a.id=3Db.id WHERE a.id=3D1 AND b.id=3D1; + +It's not a real problem since it's easy to work around, but I was wondering= +=20 +what the difficulties are for the planner in seeing that query 1 is the sam= +e=20 +as query 2. Note that it doesn't seem related to JOIN forcing the planner's= +=20 +hand, the same applies just using WHERE a.id=3Db.id + +--=20 + Richard Huxton + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 07:42:20 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sabre.velocet.net (sabre.velocet.net [216.138.209.205]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B75CD4764D7 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 07:42:16 -0500 (EST) +Received: from stark.dyndns.tv (H162.C233.tor.velocet.net [216.138.233.162]) + by sabre.velocet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 1FF8E137F61; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 07:42:19 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=stark.dyndns.tv ident=foobar) + by stark.dyndns.tv with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) + id 18qYDy-0001Zg-00; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 07:42:18 -0500 +To: Richard Huxton +Cc: +Subject: Re: Planner matching constants across tables in a join +References: <200303051113.14320.dev@archonet.com> +In-Reply-To: <200303051113.14320.dev@archonet.com> +From: Greg Stark +Organization: The Emacs Conspiracy; member since 1992 +Date: 05 Mar 2003 07:42:18 -0500 +Message-ID: <87bs0q9e8l.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Lines: 25 +User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Archive-Number: 200303/24 +X-Sequence-Number: 1322 + + +Richard Huxton writes: + +> I know this has been covered on one of the lists in the past, but I'm damned +> if I can find the keywords to locate it. +> +> If I join two tables with a comparison to a constant on one, why can't the +> planner see that the comparison applies to both tables: + +It sure does. Postgres does an impressive job of tracing equality clauses +around for just this purpose. + +> SELECT a.id FROM a JOIN b ON a.id=b.id WHERE a.id=1; +> +> runs much slower than +> +> SELECT a.id FROM a JOIN b ON a.id=b.id WHERE a.id=1 AND b.id=1; + +Really? They produce virtually the same plan for me. + +Why do you think it'll run slower? +What query are you actually finding slow? + +-- +greg + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 08:55:00 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from bob.samurai.com (bob.samurai.com [205.207.28.75]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32014475EFB + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 08:54:58 -0500 (EST) +Received: from DU150.N224.ResNet.QueensU.CA (DU150.N224.ResNet.QueensU.CA + [130.15.224.150]) by bob.samurai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id BA86A1E10; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 08:55:01 -0500 (EST) +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +From: Neil Conway +To: Tom Lane +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + daniel alvarez , Richard Huxton , + PostgreSQL Performance +In-Reply-To: <9227.1046331043@sss.pgh.pa.us> +References: <200302261358.53730.dev@archonet.com> + <24135.1046271575@www36.gmx.net> <29871.1046274964@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <032301c2de14$c64ccf70$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <8927.1046327718@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <040a01c2de2d$dac03780$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <9113.1046329568@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <044801c2de30$93d71ca0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <9227.1046331043@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Content-Type: text/plain +Organization: +Message-Id: <1046872498.10615.17.camel@tokyo> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 05 Mar 2003 08:54:58 -0500 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/25 +X-Sequence-Number: 1323 + +On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 02:30, Tom Lane wrote: +> It's moving in the wrong direction. We've been slowly eliminating +> unnecessary nonstandardisms in pg_dump output; this puts in a new one +> in a quite fundamental place. You could perhaps expect another DB +> to drop commands it didn't understand like SET SEARCH_PATH ... but if +> it drops all your CREATE TABLEs, you ain't got much dump left to load. + +Rather than specifying the use of OIDs by WITH OIDS clauses for each +CREATE TABLE in a dump, couldn't we do it by adding a SET command that +toggles the 'use_oids' GUC option prior to every CREATE TABLE? That way, +a user concerned with portability could fairly easily strip out (or just +ignore) the SET commands. + +Cheers, + +Neil +-- +Neil Conway || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC + + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 09:29:40 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from jester.inquent.com (unknown [216.208.117.7]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D08C4762C7 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:29:38 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by jester.inquent.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h25E5uve019457; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:05:56 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rbt@rbt.ca) +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +From: Rod Taylor +To: Neil Conway +Cc: Tom Lane , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + daniel alvarez , Richard Huxton , + Postgresql Performance +In-Reply-To: <1046872498.10615.17.camel@tokyo> +References: <200302261358.53730.dev@archonet.com> + <24135.1046271575@www36.gmx.net> <29871.1046274964@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <032301c2de14$c64ccf70$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <8927.1046327718@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <040a01c2de2d$dac03780$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <9113.1046329568@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <044801c2de30$93d71ca0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <9227.1046331043@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1046872498.10615.17.camel@tokyo> +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; + boundary="=-F4o8UT4G/32APyIkhcxj" +Organization: +Message-Id: <1046873156.18094.3.camel@jester> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 05 Mar 2003 09:05:56 -0500 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/27 +X-Sequence-Number: 1325 + +--=-F4o8UT4G/32APyIkhcxj +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 08:54, Neil Conway wrote: +> On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 02:30, Tom Lane wrote: +> > It's moving in the wrong direction. We've been slowly eliminating +> > unnecessary nonstandardisms in pg_dump output; this puts in a new one +> > in a quite fundamental place. You could perhaps expect another DB +> > to drop commands it didn't understand like SET SEARCH_PATH ... but if +> > it drops all your CREATE TABLEs, you ain't got much dump left to load. +>=20 +> Rather than specifying the use of OIDs by WITH OIDS clauses for each +> CREATE TABLE in a dump, couldn't we do it by adding a SET command that +> toggles the 'use_oids' GUC option prior to every CREATE TABLE? That way, +> a user concerned with portability could fairly easily strip out (or just +> ignore) the SET commands. + +Toggling the SET command prior to each table creation? Thats an +excellent idea. It should also allow us to easily transition to the +default being off after a release or two. + +--=20 +Rod Taylor + +PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc + +--=-F4o8UT4G/32APyIkhcxj +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc +Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) + +iD8DBQA+ZgRD6DETLow6vwwRAsoHAJ0ZijQXntIDczzG5Bfo26KWVXDiPACeKgV2 +z0bUAlCriwk/edBUoZYYQ70= +=MSKt +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--=-F4o8UT4G/32APyIkhcxj-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 09:25:05 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net + [194.217.242.85]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56961475A6D + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:25:03 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mwynhau.demon.co.uk ([193.237.186.96] + helo=mainbox.archonet.com) + by anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #2) + id 18qZpR-0000Th-0Z; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 14:25:05 +0000 +Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 4699F16393; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:25:04 +0000 (GMT) +Received: from client.archonet.com (client.archonet.com [192.168.1.16]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 7FB8716286; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:25:03 +0000 (GMT) +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Richard Huxton +Organization: Archonet Ltd +To: Greg Stark +Subject: Re: Planner matching constants across tables in a join +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:24:12 +0000 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +Cc: +References: <200303051113.14320.dev@archonet.com> + <87bs0q9e8l.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +In-Reply-To: <87bs0q9e8l.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303051424.12351.dev@archonet.com> +X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020531 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/26 +X-Sequence-Number: 1324 + +On Wednesday 05 Mar 2003 12:42 pm, Greg Stark wrote: +> Really? They produce virtually the same plan for me. +> +> Why do you think it'll run slower? +> What query are you actually finding slow? + +The actual query uses three tables, but isn't very complicated. Apologies f= +or=20 +the wrapping on the explain. + +EXPLAIN ANALYSE SELECT a.line_id, a.start_time, a.call_dur, i.cam_id, +i.prod_id, i.chg_per_min, i.rev_per_min +FROM campaign_items i, campaign c, activity a +WHERE +i.cam_id=3Dc.id AND a.line_id=3Di.line_id +AND a.start_time BETWEEN c.cam_from AND c.cam_to +AND a.line_id=3D'0912345 0004' AND i.line_id=3D'0912345 0004'; + +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 +QUERY PLAN +---------- + Merge Join (cost=3D348.01..348.72 rows=3D1 width=3D72) (actual time=3D115= +.43..116.27=20 +rows=3D21 loops=3D1) + Merge Cond: ("outer".id =3D "inner".cam_id) + Join Filter: (("outer".line_id)::text =3D ("inner".line_id)::text) + -> Sort (cost=3D245.45..245.75 rows=3D118 width=3D40) (actual time=3D8= +3.98..84.10=20 +rows=3D94 loops=3D1) + Sort Key: c.id + -> Nested Loop (cost=3D0.00..241.40 rows=3D118 width=3D40) (actu= +al=20 +time=3D3.83..83.27 rows=3D94 loops=3D1) + Join Filter: (("outer".start_time >=3D=20 +("inner".cam_from)::timestamp without time zone) AND ("outer".start_time <= +=3D=20 +("inner".cam_to)::timestamp without time zone)) + -> Seq Scan on activity a (cost=3D0.00..199.00 rows=3D11= +=20 +width=3D28) (actual time=3D3.06..54.14 rows=3D19 loops=3D1) + Filter: ((line_id)::text =3D '0912345 0004'::text) + -> Seq Scan on campaign c (cost=3D0.00..2.00 rows=3D100 wi= +dth=3D12)=20 +(actual time=3D0.02..0.84 rows=3D100 loops=3D19) + -> Sort (cost=3D102.56..102.57 rows=3D5 width=3D32) (actual time=3D31.= +36..31.39=20 +rows=3D20 loops=3D1) + Sort Key: i.cam_id + -> Seq Scan on campaign_items i (cost=3D0.00..102.50 rows=3D5 wi= +dth=3D32)=20 +(actual time=3D17.16..31.11 rows=3D6 loops=3D1) + Filter: ((line_id)::text =3D '0912345 0004'::text) + Total runtime: 117.08 msec +(15 rows) + + +and this is the plan where I just check the one line_id: + + +EXPLAIN ANALYSE SELECT a.line_id, a.start_time, a.call_dur, i.cam_id,=20 +i.prod_id, i.chg_per_min, i.rev_per_min +FROM campaign_items i, campaign c, activity a +WHERE +i.cam_id=3Dc.id AND a.line_id=3Di.line_id +AND a.start_time BETWEEN c.cam_from AND c.cam_to +AND i.line_id=3D'0912345 0004'; +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= +=20=20 +QUERY PLAN +--------------------------------------- + Hash Join (cost=3D2.25..1623.70 rows=3D6 width=3D72) (actual time=3D48.27= +..974.30=20 +rows=3D21 loops=3D1) + Hash Cond: ("outer".cam_id =3D "inner".id) + Join Filter: (("outer".start_time >=3D ("inner".cam_from)::timestamp wit= +hout=20 +time zone) AND ("outer".start_time <=3D ("inner".cam_to)::timestamp without= +=20 +time zone)) + -> Nested Loop (cost=3D0.00..1619.87 rows=3D53 width=3D60) (actual=20 +time=3D24.49..969.33 rows=3D114 loops=3D1) + Join Filter: (("inner".line_id)::text =3D ("outer".line_id)::text) + -> Seq Scan on campaign_items i (cost=3D0.00..102.50 rows=3D5 wi= +dth=3D32)=20 +(actual time=3D15.72..28.52 rows=3D6 loops=3D1) + Filter: ((line_id)::text =3D '0912345 0004'::text) + -> Seq Scan on activity a (cost=3D0.00..174.00 rows=3D10000 widt= +h=3D28)=20 +(actual time=3D0.03..101.95 rows=3D10000 loops=3D6) + -> Hash (cost=3D2.00..2.00 rows=3D100 width=3D12) (actual time=3D1.54.= +.1.54=20 +rows=3D0 loops=3D1) + -> Seq Scan on campaign c (cost=3D0.00..2.00 rows=3D100 width=3D= +12)=20 +(actual time=3D0.06..0.94 rows=3D100 loops=3D1) + Total runtime: 975.13 msec +(11 rows) + +Table campaign has 100 rows, campaign_items 5000, activity 10000. My guess = +is=20 +that the planner starts with "campaign" because of the low number of rows,= +=20 +but it still looks like filtering on "activity" would help things. Indeed,= +=20 +testing a.line_id instead of i.line_id does make a difference. + +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= +=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 +QUERY PLAN +------------------- + Hash Join (cost=3D241.70..457.54 rows=3D6 width=3D72) (actual time=3D161.= +20..225.68=20 +rows=3D21 loops=3D1) + Hash Cond: ("outer".cam_id =3D "inner".id) + Join Filter: (("inner".line_id)::text =3D ("outer".line_id)::text) + -> Seq Scan on campaign_items i (cost=3D0.00..90.00 rows=3D5000 width= +=3D32)=20 +(actual time=3D0.03..72.00 rows=3D5000 loops=3D1) + -> Hash (cost=3D241.40..241.40 rows=3D118 width=3D40) (actual time=3D8= +5.46..85.46=20 +rows=3D0 loops=3D1) + -> Nested Loop (cost=3D0.00..241.40 rows=3D118 width=3D40) (actu= +al=20 +time=3D3.80..84.66 rows=3D94 loops=3D1) + Join Filter: (("outer".start_time >=3D=20 +("inner".cam_from)::timestamp without time zone) AND ("outer".start_time <= +=3D=20 +("inner".cam_to)::timestamp without time zone)) + -> Seq Scan on activity a (cost=3D0.00..199.00 rows=3D11= +=20 +width=3D28) (actual time=3D3.03..54.48 rows=3D19 loops=3D1) + Filter: ((line_id)::text =3D '0912345 0004'::text) + -> Seq Scan on campaign c (cost=3D0.00..2.00 rows=3D100 wi= +dth=3D12)=20 +(actual time=3D0.03..0.89 rows=3D100 loops=3D19) + Total runtime: 226.51 msec +(11 rows) + +--=20 + Richard Huxton + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 10:02:22 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sabre.velocet.net (sabre.velocet.net [216.138.209.205]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D82E54761C0 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:02:19 -0500 (EST) +Received: from stark.dyndns.tv (H162.C233.tor.velocet.net [216.138.233.162]) + by sabre.velocet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 55AEA13808F; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:02:20 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=stark.dyndns.tv ident=foobar) + by stark.dyndns.tv with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) + id 18qaPS-000245-00; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 10:02:18 -0500 +To: Richard Huxton +Cc: Greg Stark , +Subject: Re: Planner matching constants across tables in a join +References: <200303051113.14320.dev@archonet.com> + <87bs0q9e8l.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> <200303051424.12351.dev@archonet.com> +In-Reply-To: <200303051424.12351.dev@archonet.com> +From: Greg Stark +Organization: The Emacs Conspiracy; member since 1992 +Date: 05 Mar 2003 10:02:17 -0500 +Message-ID: <87llzt97ra.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Lines: 17 +User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Archive-Number: 200303/28 +X-Sequence-Number: 1326 + +Richard Huxton writes: + +> Filter: ((line_id)::text = '0912345 0004'::text) + +So I think this means that line_id is being casted to "text". Though I'm not +clear why it would be choosing "text" for the constant if line_id wasn't text +to begin with. + +In any case my plans here look like: +> Filter: (aa = 'x'::text) + +so it looks like there's something extra going on in your plan. + +what does your table definition look like? + +-- +greg + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 10:08:43 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E8944762F9 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:08:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h25F8dx6019226; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:08:39 -0500 (EST) +To: Greg Stark +Cc: Richard Huxton , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Planner matching constants across tables in a join +In-reply-to: <87bs0q9e8l.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +References: <200303051113.14320.dev@archonet.com> + <87bs0q9e8l.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Comments: In-reply-to Greg Stark + message dated "05 Mar 2003 07:42:18 -0500" +Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 10:08:38 -0500 +Message-ID: <19225.1046876918@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/29 +X-Sequence-Number: 1327 + +Greg Stark writes: +> Richard Huxton writes: +>> If I join two tables with a comparison to a constant on one, why can't the +>> planner see that the comparison applies to both tables: + +> It sure does. Postgres does an impressive job of tracing equality clauses +> around for just this purpose. + +CVS tip does. Existing releases don't... + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 10:21:00 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60FA84762FA + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:20:54 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h25FKfx6019294; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:20:41 -0500 (EST) +To: Neil Conway +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + daniel alvarez , Richard Huxton , + PostgreSQL Performance +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +In-reply-to: <1046872498.10615.17.camel@tokyo> +References: <200302261358.53730.dev@archonet.com> + <24135.1046271575@www36.gmx.net> <29871.1046274964@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <032301c2de14$c64ccf70$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <8927.1046327718@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <040a01c2de2d$dac03780$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <9113.1046329568@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <044801c2de30$93d71ca0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <9227.1046331043@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1046872498.10615.17.camel@tokyo> +Comments: In-reply-to Neil Conway + message dated "05 Mar 2003 08:54:58 -0500" +Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 10:20:40 -0500 +Message-ID: <19293.1046877640@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/30 +X-Sequence-Number: 1328 + +Neil Conway writes: +> Rather than specifying the use of OIDs by WITH OIDS clauses for each +> CREATE TABLE in a dump, couldn't we do it by adding a SET command that +> toggles the 'use_oids' GUC option prior to every CREATE TABLE? + +Seems better than cluttering the CREATE TABLE itself with them, I guess. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 11:13:04 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from anchor-post-39.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-39.mail.demon.net + [194.217.242.80]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DCE24762B8 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:12:59 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mwynhau.demon.co.uk ([193.237.186.96] + helo=mainbox.archonet.com) + by anchor-post-39.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #2) + id 18qbVv-0004xQ-0d; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 16:13:03 +0000 +Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 42DCC1784E; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:13:02 +0000 (GMT) +Received: from client.archonet.com (client.archonet.com [192.168.1.16]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 8E2C31646A; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:13:01 +0000 (GMT) +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Richard Huxton +Organization: Archonet Ltd +To: Greg Stark +Subject: Re: Planner matching constants across tables in a join +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:12:09 +0000 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +Cc: Greg Stark , +References: <200303051113.14320.dev@archonet.com> + <200303051424.12351.dev@archonet.com> + <87llzt97ra.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +In-Reply-To: <87llzt97ra.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303051612.09558.dev@archonet.com> +X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020531 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/31 +X-Sequence-Number: 1329 + +On Wednesday 05 Mar 2003 3:02 pm, Greg Stark wrote: +> Richard Huxton writes: +> > Filter: ((line_id)::text =3D '0912345 0004'::text) +> +> So I think this means that line_id is being casted to "text". Though I'm +> not clear why it would be choosing "text" for the constant if line_id +> wasn't text to begin with. + +A domain defined as varchar() actually - which is why it's not using an ind= +ex,=20 +but that's neither here nor there regarding the constant issue. + +> In any case my plans here look like: +> > Filter: (aa =3D 'x'::text) +> +> so it looks like there's something extra going on in your plan. +> +> what does your table definition look like? + +rms=3D> \d campaign + Table "rms.campaign" + Column | Type | Modifiers +----------+-----------+----------- + id | integer | not null + title | item_name | + cam_from | date | + cam_to | date | + owner | integer | +Indexes: campaign_pkey primary key btree (id), + campaign_from_idx btree (cam_from), + campaign_to_idx btree (cam_to) + +rms=3D> \d campaign_items + Table "rms.campaign_items" + Column | Type | Modifiers +-------------+---------+----------- + cam_id | integer | not null + line_id | tel_num | not null + prod_id | integer | not null + chg_per_min | integer | + rev_per_min | integer | +Indexes: campaign_items_pkey primary key btree (cam_id, line_id, prod_id), + cam_item_line_idx btree (line_id) +Foreign Key constraints: $1 FOREIGN KEY (cam_id) REFERENCES campaign(id) ON= +=20 +UPDATE NO ACTION ON DELETE NO ACTION, + $2 FOREIGN KEY (line_id) REFERENCES line(telno) ON= +=20 +UPDATE NO ACTION ON DELETE NO ACTION, + $3 FOREIGN KEY (prod_id) REFERENCES product(id) ON= +=20 +UPDATE NO ACTION ON DELETE NO ACTION + +rms=3D> \d activity + Table "rms.activity" + Column | Type | Modifiers +------------+-----------------------------+----------- + line_id | tel_num | not null + start_time | timestamp without time zone | not null + call_dur | integer | +Indexes: activity_pkey primary key btree (line_id, start_time), + activity_start_idx btree (start_time) +Foreign Key constraints: $1 FOREIGN KEY (line_id) REFERENCES line(telno) ON= +=20 +UPDATE NO ACTION ON DELETE NO ACTION + + +--=20 + Richard Huxton + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 14:00:47 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6934B475CE5 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:00:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [216.135.165.74] (account ) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.0.2) + with HTTP id 2881474; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 11:00:23 -0800 +From: "Josh Berkus" +Subject: Re: Planner matching constants across tables in a +To: Richard Huxton , Greg Stark +Cc: Greg Stark , +X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro Web Mailer v.4.0.2 +Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 11:00:23 -0800 +Message-ID: +In-Reply-To: <200303051612.09558.dev@archonet.com> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/32 +X-Sequence-Number: 1330 + +Richard, + +> A domain defined as varchar() actually - which is why it's not using +> an index, +> but that's neither here nor there regarding the constant issue. + +You might improve your performance overall if you cast the constant to +tel_num before doing the comparison in the query. Right now, the +parser is casting the whole column to text instead, because it can't +tell that the constant you supply is a valid tel_num. + +-Josh + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 14:26:39 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net + [194.217.242.91]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A992A476302 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:26:36 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mwynhau.demon.co.uk ([193.237.186.96] + helo=mainbox.archonet.com) + by anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) + id 18qeXE-000ATP-0X; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 19:26:36 +0000 +Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 6A4901797B; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:26:35 +0000 (GMT) +Received: from client.archonet.com (client.archonet.com [192.168.1.16]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id C6A071797A; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:26:34 +0000 (GMT) +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Richard Huxton +Organization: Archonet Ltd +To: "Josh Berkus" , Greg Stark +Subject: Re: Planner matching constants across tables in a +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:25:43 +0000 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +Cc: Greg Stark , +References: +In-Reply-To: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303051925.43178.dev@archonet.com> +X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020531 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/33 +X-Sequence-Number: 1331 + +On Wednesday 05 Mar 2003 7:00 pm, Josh Berkus wrote: +> Richard, +> +> > A domain defined as varchar() actually - which is why it's not using +> > an index, +> > but that's neither here nor there regarding the constant issue. +> +> You might improve your performance overall if you cast the constant to +> tel_num before doing the comparison in the query. Right now, the +> parser is casting the whole column to text instead, because it can't +> tell that the constant you supply is a valid tel_num. + +That's what I thought, but... + +rms=3D> EXPLAIN ANALYSE SELECT * FROM line WHERE telno=3D'0912345 0004'::te= +l_num; + QUERY PLAN +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +------------------- + Seq Scan on line (cost=3D0.00..20.50 rows=3D1 width=3D28) (actual time=3D= +0.10..5.28=20 +rows=3D1 loops=3D1) + Filter: ((telno)::text =3D ('0912345 0004'::character varying)::text) + Total runtime: 5.43 msec + +rms=3D> EXPLAIN ANALYSE SELECT * FROM line WHERE telno=3D'0912345 0004'::va= +rchar; + QUERY PLAN +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +-------------------------------------- + Index Scan using line_pkey on line (cost=3D0.00..5.78 rows=3D1 width=3D28= +) (actual=20 +time=3D14.03..14.03 rows=3D1 loops=3D1) + Index Cond: ((telno)::character varying =3D '0912345 0004'::character=20 +varying) + Total runtime: 14.28 msec + +Ignoring the times (fake data on my test box) it seems like there's an issu= +e=20 +in comparing against DOMAIN defined types. Or maybe it's in the index=20 +definition, although I don't know how to find out the type of an index. +--=20 + Richard Huxton + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 14:32:39 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net + [194.217.242.85]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D64F475CE5 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:32:38 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mwynhau.demon.co.uk ([193.237.186.96] + helo=mainbox.archonet.com) + by anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #2) + id 18qed3-0005sr-0Z; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 19:32:38 +0000 +Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 25D6C1797B; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:32:37 +0000 (GMT) +Received: from client.archonet.com (client.archonet.com [192.168.1.16]) + by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 7C18017978; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:32:36 +0000 (GMT) +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Richard Huxton +Organization: Archonet Ltd +To: "Josh Berkus" , Greg Stark +Subject: Re: Planner matching constants across tables in a +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:31:44 +0000 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +Cc: +References: +In-Reply-To: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303051931.44701.dev@archonet.com> +X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020531 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/34 +X-Sequence-Number: 1332 + +On Wednesday 05 Mar 2003 7:00 pm, Josh Berkus wrote: +> You might improve your performance overall if you cast the constant to +> tel_num before doing the comparison in the query.=20 + +Stranger and stranger... + +richardh=3D# CREATE DOMAIN intdom int4; +richardh=3D# CREATE DOMAIN textdom text; +richardh=3D# CREATE TABLE domtest (a intdom, b textdom); +richardh=3D# CREATE INDEX domtest_a_idx ON domtest (a); +richardh=3D# CREATE INDEX domtest_b_idx ON domtest (b); +richardh=3D# INSERT INTO domtest VALUES (1,'aaa'); +richardh=3D# INSERT INTO domtest VALUES (2,'bbb'); +richardh=3D# INSERT INTO domtest VALUES (3,'ccc'); + +richardh=3D# EXPLAIN ANALYSE SELECT * FROM domtest WHERE a=3D1::intdom; +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +---------------------- + Seq Scan on domtest (cost=3D0.00..22.50 rows=3D5 width=3D36) (actual=20 +time=3D0.08..0.11 rows=3D1 loops=3D1) + Filter: ((a)::oid =3D 1::oid) + +richardh=3D# EXPLAIN ANALYSE SELECT * FROM domtest WHERE a=3D1::int4; +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +-------------------------------------------- + Index Scan using domtest_a_idx on domtest (cost=3D0.00..17.07 rows=3D5 wi= +dth=3D36)=20 +(actual time=3D0.09..0.11 rows=3D1 loops=3D1) + Index Cond: ((a)::integer =3D 1) + +richardh=3D# EXPLAIN ANALYSE SELECT * FROM domtest WHERE b=3D'aaa'::textdom; +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +-------------------------------------------- + Index Scan using domtest_b_idx on domtest (cost=3D0.00..17.07 rows=3D5 wi= +dth=3D36)=20 +(actual time=3D0.09..0.11 rows=3D1 loops=3D1) + Index Cond: ((b)::text =3D 'aaa'::text) + +richardh=3D# EXPLAIN ANALYSE SELECT * FROM domtest WHERE b=3D'aaa'::text; +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +-------------------------------------------- + Index Scan using domtest_b_idx on domtest (cost=3D0.00..17.07 rows=3D5 wi= +dth=3D36)=20 +(actual time=3D0.10..0.12 rows=3D1 loops=3D1) + Index Cond: ((b)::text =3D 'aaa'::text) + +Can't think why we're getting casts to type "oid" in the first example - I'= +d=20 +have thought int4 would be the default. I'm guessing the text domain always= +=20 +works because that's the default cast. + +--=20 + Richard Huxton + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 16:11:31 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF554762E1 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:11:28 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [216.135.165.74] (HELO lazarus) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP-TLS id 2881705; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 13:11:09 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: "Tim Mohler" , + +Subject: Re: Batch copying of databases +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:37:39 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +References: +In-Reply-To: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303051137.39517.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/36 +X-Sequence-Number: 1334 + +Tim, + +> I'm new to Postgres, and am not even the DBA for the system. I'm just a +> sysadmin trying to make things run faster. Every month, we copy over a 25 +> million row table from the production server to the reporting server. Tot= +al +> size is something like 40 gigabytes. + +Are you doing this through COPY files, or some other means? + +--=20 +Josh Berkus +josh@agliodbs.com +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 15:26:49 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from nycsmtp1out.rdc-nyc.rr.com (nycsmtp1out.rdc-nyc.rr.com + [24.29.99.222]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B5014762B8 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 15:26:46 -0500 (EST) +Received: from ibmlaptop (24-29-154-100.nyc.rr.com [24.29.154.100]) + by nycsmtp1out.rdc-nyc.rr.com (8.12.1/Road Runner SMTP Server 1.0) with + SMTP id h25KQlk5007516 for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 15:26:47 -0500 (EST) +From: "Tim Mohler" +To: +Subject: Batch copying of databases +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 15:26:27 -0500 +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 +Importance: Normal +X-Archive-Number: 200303/35 +X-Sequence-Number: 1333 + +Hi all, + +I'm new to Postgres, and am not even the DBA for the system. I'm just a +sysadmin trying to make things run faster. Every month, we copy over a 25 +million row table from the production server to the reporting server. Total +size is something like 40 gigabytes. + +The copy in takes close to 24 hours, and I see the disks being hammered by +hundreds of small writes every second. The system is mostly waiting on I/O. +Is there any facility in Postgres to force batching of the I/O transactions +to something more reasonable than 8K? + +Thanks for any advice, +Tim + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 22:16:57 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: by postgresql.org (Postfix, from userid 1116) + id 1876F4762E0; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 22:16:56 -0500 (EST) +To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Message-Id: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 22:16:56 -0500 (EST) +From: tgl@postgresql.org (Tom Lane) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/14 +X-Sequence-Number: 9257 + +CVSROOT: /cvsroot +Module name: pgsql-server +Changes by: tgl@postgresql.org 03/03/05 22:16:56 + +Modified files: + . : configure configure.in + src/include : pg_config.h.in + src/interfaces/libpq: fe-misc.c + +Log message: + Use poll(2) in preference to select(2), if available. This solves + problems in applications that may have a large number of files open, + such that libpq's socket number exceeds the range supported by fd_set. + From Chris Brown. + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 22:30:06 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964FD476302 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 22:30:01 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h263U4V40523 + for pgsql-committers@postgresql.org; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:30:04 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101]) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h263U2740478; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:30:02 +0800 (WST) +Message-ID: <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +To: , + "Tom Lane" +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:30:11 +0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/15 +X-Sequence-Number: 9258 + +Has anyone ever thought about adding kqueue (for *BSD) support to Postgres, +instead of using select? + +LIBRARY + Standard C Library (libc, -lc) + +SYNOPSIS + #include + #include + #include + + int + kqueue(void); + + int + kevent(int kq, const struct kevent *changelist, int nchanges, + struct kevent *eventlist, int nevents, + const struct timespec *timeout); + + EV_SET(&kev, ident, filter, flags, fflags, data, udata); + +DESCRIPTION + kqueue() provides a generic method of notifying the user when an event + happens or a condition holds, based on the results of small pieces of + kernel code termed filters. A kevent is identified by the (ident, fil- + ter) pair; there may only be one unique kevent per kqueue. + + The filter is executed upon the initial registration of a kevent in +order + to detect whether a preexisting condition is present, and is also exe- + cuted whenever an event is passed to the filter for evaluation. If the + filter determines that the condition should be reported, then the +kevent + is placed on the kqueue for the user to retrieve. + + The filter is also run when the user attempts to retrieve the kevent +from + the kqueue. If the filter indicates that the condition that triggered + the event no longer holds, the kevent is removed from the kqueue and is + not returned. + + +Chris + +> CVSROOT: /cvsroot +> Module name: pgsql-server +> Changes by: tgl@postgresql.org 03/03/05 22:16:56 +> +> Modified files: +> . : configure configure.in +> src/include : pg_config.h.in +> src/interfaces/libpq: fe-misc.c +> +> Log message: +> Use poll(2) in preference to select(2), if available. This solves +> problems in applications that may have a large number of files open, +> such that libpq's socket number exceeds the range supported by fd_set. +> From Chris Brown. + + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 22:34:29 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E052474E53 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 22:34:27 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h263YRx6011078; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 22:34:27 -0500 (EST) +To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +Cc: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +In-reply-to: <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +Comments: In-reply-to "Christopher Kings-Lynne" + message dated "Thu, 06 Mar 2003 11:30:11 +0800" +Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 22:34:27 -0500 +Message-ID: <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/16 +X-Sequence-Number: 9259 + +"Christopher Kings-Lynne" writes: +> Has anyone ever thought about adding kqueue (for *BSD) support to Postgres, +> instead of using select? + +Why? poll() is standard. kqueue isn't, AFAIK. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 22:42:36 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 741BF476120 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 22:42:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h263gbA41274 + for pgsql-committers@postgresql.org; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:42:37 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101]) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h263gX741184; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:42:33 +0800 (WST) +Message-ID: <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +To: "Tom Lane" +Cc: +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:42:42 +0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/17 +X-Sequence-Number: 9260 + +> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" writes: +> > Has anyone ever thought about adding kqueue (for *BSD) support to +Postgres, +> > instead of using select? +> +> Why? poll() is standard. kqueue isn't, AFAIK. + +It's supposed be a whole heap faster - there is no polling involved... + +Chris + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 22:47:54 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A9CE475FEE + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 22:47:52 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h263lqx6012229; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 22:47:52 -0500 (EST) +To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +Cc: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +In-reply-to: <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +Comments: In-reply-to "Christopher Kings-Lynne" + message dated "Thu, 06 Mar 2003 11:42:42 +0800" +Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 22:47:51 -0500 +Message-ID: <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/18 +X-Sequence-Number: 9261 + +"Christopher Kings-Lynne" writes: +>>> Has anyone ever thought about adding kqueue (for *BSD) support to +>>> Postgres, instead of using select? +>> +>> Why? poll() is standard. kqueue isn't, AFAIK. + +> It's supposed be a whole heap faster - there is no polling involved... + +Supposed by whom? Faster than what? And how would it not poll? + +The way libpq uses this call, it's either probing for current status +(timeout=0) or it's willing to block, possibly indefinitely, until the +desired condition arises. It does not sit there in a busy-wait loop. +I can't see any reason to think that an OS-specific API would give +any marked difference in performance. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 23:19:22 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4FE5474E53 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 23:19:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h264JHx6012401; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 23:19:17 -0500 (EST) +To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +Cc: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +In-reply-to: <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +Comments: In-reply-to "Christopher Kings-Lynne" + message dated "Thu, 06 Mar 2003 11:42:42 +0800" +Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 23:19:16 -0500 +Message-ID: <12400.1046924356@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/19 +X-Sequence-Number: 9262 + +"Christopher Kings-Lynne" writes: +> It's supposed be a whole heap faster - there is no polling involved... + +I looked into this more. AFAICT, the scenario in which kqueue is +said to be faster involves watching a large number of file +descriptors simultaneously. Since libpq is only watching one +descriptor, I don't see the benefit of adopting kqueue ... + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 5 23:33:51 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (momjian.navpoint.com [207.106.42.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE365474E53 + for ; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 23:33:46 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from pgman@localhost) + by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) id h264XaQ11718; + Wed, 5 Mar 2003 23:33:36 -0500 (EST) +From: Bruce Momjian +Message-Id: <200303060433.h264XaQ11718@candle.pha.pa.us> +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +In-Reply-To: <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> +To: Tom Lane +Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 23:33:36 -0500 (EST) +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99 (25)] +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII +X-Archive-Number: 200303/20 +X-Sequence-Number: 9263 + + +I assume he just assumed poll() actually polls. I doesn't. It is just +like select(). + + +--------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +Tom Lane wrote: +> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" writes: +> >>> Has anyone ever thought about adding kqueue (for *BSD) support to +> >>> Postgres, instead of using select? +> >> +> >> Why? poll() is standard. kqueue isn't, AFAIK. +> +> > It's supposed be a whole heap faster - there is no polling involved... +> +> Supposed by whom? Faster than what? And how would it not poll? +> +> The way libpq uses this call, it's either probing for current status +> (timeout=0) or it's willing to block, possibly indefinitely, until the +> desired condition arises. It does not sit there in a busy-wait loop. +> I can't see any reason to think that an OS-specific API would give +> any marked difference in performance. +> +> regards, tom lane +> +> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate +> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your +> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly +> + +-- + Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us + pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 01:53:01 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from www.pspl.co.in (www.pspl.co.in [202.54.11.65]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E654476178 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 01:52:58 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by www.pspl.co.in (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h266qvq01166 + for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:22:57 +0530 +Received: from daithan (daithan.intranet.pspl.co.in [192.168.7.161]) + by www.pspl.co.in (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h266quW01159 + for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:22:57 +0530 +From: "Shridhar Daithankar" +To: +Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 12:23:42 +0530 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Subject: Re: Batch copying of databases +Reply-To: shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in +Message-ID: <3E673DCE.24575.352CED2@localhost> +In-reply-to: +X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02) +Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII +Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT +Content-description: Mail message body +X-Archive-Number: 200303/37 +X-Sequence-Number: 1335 + +On 5 Mar 2003 at 15:26, Tim Mohler wrote: + +> Hi all, +> +> I'm new to Postgres, and am not even the DBA for the system. I'm just a +> sysadmin trying to make things run faster. Every month, we copy over a 25 +> million row table from the production server to the reporting server. Total +> size is something like 40 gigabytes. +> +> The copy in takes close to 24 hours, and I see the disks being hammered by +> hundreds of small writes every second. The system is mostly waiting on I/O. +> Is there any facility in Postgres to force batching of the I/O transactions +> to something more reasonable than 8K? + +Well, 8K has nothing to with transactions in postgresql. + +You need to make sure at least two things. + +1. You are using copy. By default postgresql writes each inserts in it's own +transaction which is seriously slow for bulk load. Copy bunches the rwos in a +single transaction and is quite fast. + +if you need to preprocess the data, batch something like 1K-10K records in a +single transaction. + +2. Postgresql bulk load is not as fast as many of us would like, especially +when compared to oracle. So if you know you are going to bulk load using say +copy, don't load the data from a single connection. Split the data file in say +5-10 parts and start loading all of them simaltaneously. It does speed up the +things. At least it certainly saturates the disk bandwidth which single load +does not do many times. + +On a side note, for such a bulk load consider dropping any indexes and foreign +key contraints. + +HTH + + +Bye + Shridhar + +-- +Turnaucka's Law: The attention span of a computer is only as long as its +electrical cord. + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 13:21:23 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (internal.ext.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8ED0476128 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 04:41:29 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id C122321059; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 01:41:17 -0800 (PST) +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 01:41:17 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Tom Lane +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Message-ID: <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="G5yIW5EaChZ5gJdA" +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/55 +X-Sequence-Number: 9298 + +--G5yIW5EaChZ5gJdA +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +> >>> Has anyone ever thought about adding kqueue (for *BSD) support to +> >>> Postgres, instead of using select? +> >>=20 +> >> Why? poll() is standard. kqueue isn't, AFAIK. +>=20 +> > It's supposed be a whole heap faster - there is no polling involved... +>=20 +> Supposed by whom? Faster than what? And how would it not poll? +>=20 +> The way libpq uses this call, it's either probing for current status +> (timeout=3D0) or it's willing to block, possibly indefinitely, until the +> desired condition arises. It does not sit there in a busy-wait loop. +> I can't see any reason to think that an OS-specific API would give +> any marked difference in performance. + +Heh, kqueue is _the_ reason to use FreeBSD. + +http://www.kegel.com/dkftpbench/Poller_bench.html#results + +I've toyed with the idea of adding this because it is monstrously more +efficient than select()/poll() in basically every way, shape, and +form. + +That said, in terms of performance perks, I'd think migrating the +backend to using mmap() would yield a bigger performance benefit (see +Stevens) to a larger group of people than adding FreeBSD's kqueue +interface (something I plan on doing at some point if no one beats me +to it). mmap() + write() for FreeBSD is a zero-copy socket operation +and likely is on other platforms. Reducing the number of pages that +have to be copied around would be a big win in terms of sending data +to clients as well as scanning through data. Files are also only +mmap()'ed in the kernel once with BSD's VM system which could reduce +the RAM consumed by backends considerably. + +mmap() would also be an interesting way of providing some kind of +atomicity for MVCC (re: WAL, use msync() to have the mapped region hit +the disk before the change). I was actually quite surprised when I +grep'ed through the code and found that mmap() wasn't in use +_anywhere_. The TODO seems to be full of messages, but not much in +the way of authoritative statements. Is this one of the areas of +PostgreSQL that just needs to get slowly migrated to use mmap() or are +there any gaping reasons why to not use the family of system calls? + +-sc + +--=20 +Sean Chittenden + +--G5yIW5EaChZ5gJdA +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature +Content-Disposition: inline + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Comment: Sean Chittenden + +iD8DBQE+Zxe93ZnjH7yEs0ERAmcgAJ9zLfxB62TbCeeXby7GEsZBpOb0rACg5OR4 +AanBKeFWVvARKCN0Un/xCm8= +=6nPT +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--G5yIW5EaChZ5gJdA-- + +From pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 05:50:37 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org +Received: from 127.0.0.1 (unknown [61.5.117.62]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5211047610A + for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 05:50:08 -0500 (EST) +From: "Mr.F" +To: +Subject: New Interface for Win +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 17:51:28 +0700 +Message-ID: <000201c2e3ce$5702bac0$de00a8c0@fhf> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0003_01C2E409.03631960" +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 +Importance: Normal +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 +X-GCMulti: 1 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/46 +X-Sequence-Number: 7694 + +This is a multi-part message in MIME format. + +------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C2E409.03631960 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +Hi all, +=20 +After two month we have been migrating from Ms-Sql Server 7 to PosgreSQL +7.3, we also build new interface to connect from client in Win base to +Posgresql and it call =93PDAdmin=94. PDAdmin is a Posgresql tools to help +Database Administrator (DBA) for a make a Trigger, Function, or Rule +quickly because the User just could input the parameters that important +only and then the program will perform frame program automatically and +can generate script Trigger/Function/Rule from posgresql database just +click in table or schema. +=20 +PDAdmin be make by concept and method difference by data tools for same +PosgreSQL like PgAdmin, because first concept this program to help DBA +for beginner or advance (in my team) to make transactional script to be +use in PosgreSQL Version 7.3 like Trigger, Function or Rule easily, +quick and flexible with show capability the editor.=20 +=20 +Now, we wishful to share =93PDAdmin version 1.0.5=94 in this milist =93FREE= +=94 +=20 +Other features: +-. Connection to PosgreSQL server without ODBC +-. Update condition of trigger with choice checkbox or radio button. +-. Available Database Explorer +-. Shortcut to general function PostreSQL +-. User define shortcut +-. Block Execute Command +-. Block Increase/Decrease Indent +-. Export Trigger/Function/Rule from database to file +-. Import data from Ms-Sql Server +-. Freeware, No Limit, No Ads. +=20 +Requirements: +-. Windows 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP +-. File Size 1150Kb +-. Uninstaller Included: Yes +-. Recommended: PosgreSQL 7.3.x +=20 +Download:=20 +http://www.csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/PDASetup.exe +=20 +Screenshot: +http://www.csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/pdadmin1.jpg +=20 +Regards, +Fadjar Hamidi + +------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C2E409.03631960 +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ +

Hi all,

+ +

 

+ +

After two month we have been migrating from Ms-Sql Serve= +r 7 +to PosgreSQL 7.3, we also build new interface to connect from client in Win +base to Posgresql and it call “PDAdmin”. PDAdmin is a Posgresql +tools to help Database Administrator (DBA) for a make a Trigger, Function, = +or +Rule quickly because the User just could input the parameters that important +only and then the program will perform frame program automatically and can +generate script Trigger/Function/Rule from posgresql database just click in +table or schema.

+ +

 

+ +

PDAdmin be make by concept and method difference by data +tools for same PosgreSQL like PgAdmin, because first concept this program to +help DBA for beginner or advance (in my team) to make transactional script = +to +be use in PosgreSQL Version 7.3 like Trigger, Function or Rule easily, quick +and flexible with show capability the editor.

+ +

 

+ +

Now, we wishful to share “PDAdmin version 1.0.5= +221; +in this milist “FREE”

+ +

 

+ +

Other features:

+ +

-. Connection to PosgreSQL server without ODBC

+ +

-. Update condition of trigger with choice checkbox or r= +adio +button.

+ +

-. Available Database Explorer<= +/p> + +

-. Shortcut to general function PostreSQL

+ +

-. User define shortcut

+ +

-. Block Execute Command

+ +

-. Block Increase/Decrease Indent

+ +

-. Export Trigger/Function/Rule from database to file

+ +

-. Import data from Ms-Sql Server

+ +

-. Freeware, No Limit, No Ads.<= +/p> + +

 

+ +

Requirements:

+ +

-. Windows +95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP

+ +

-. File Size 1150Kb

+ +

-. Uninstaller Included: Yes

+ +

-. Recommended: PosgreSQL 7.3.x= +

+ +

 

+ +

Download:

+ +

http://www.cs= +ahome.com/download/PDAdmin/PDASetup.exe

+ +

 

+ +

Screenshot:

+ +

http://www.cs= +ahome.com/download/PDAdmin/pdadmin1.jpg

+ +

 

+ +

Regards,

+ +

Fadjar Hamidi

+ +
+ + + + + +------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C2E409.03631960-- + + +From pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 09:44:47 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org +Received: from ndl1mr1-a-fixed (ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in [61.0.0.45]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF37474E4F + for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 09:44:45 -0500 (EST) +Received: from conversion-daemon.ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in by + ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in + (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 0.9 (built Jul 29 2002)) + id <0HBC000010QTJE@ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in> for + pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 20:14:47 +0530 (IST) +Received: from societykotla ([61.0.95.110]) by ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in + (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 0.9 (built Jul 29 2002)) + with ESMTPA id <0HBC00CVJ0Y1P1@ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in> for + pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 20:14:47 +0530 (IST) +Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 20:18:13 +0530 +From: Aspire Something +Subject: Re: New Interface for Win +To: Pg Admin +Reply-To: Aspire Something +Message-id: <001b01c2e3ef$6bfb5ec0$c9c832c0@societykotla> +MIME-version: 1.0 +X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 +Content-type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="Boundary_(ID_bggRZKMEUU2wWlbnkurASQ)" +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-priority: Normal +References: <000201c2e3ce$5702bac0$de00a8c0@fhf> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/48 +X-Sequence-Number: 7696 + +This is a multi-part message in MIME format. + +--Boundary_(ID_bggRZKMEUU2wWlbnkurASQ) +Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 +Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT + +Can U please pass on the Ip of your server my ISP's DNS do not have your websites entry + + + + ----- Original Message ----- + From: Mr.F + To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org + Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 4:21 PM + Subject: [ADMIN] New Interface for Win + + + Hi all, + + + + After two month we have been migrating from Ms-Sql Server 7 to PosgreSQL 7.3, we also build new interface to connect from client in Win base to Posgresql and it call "PDAdmin". PDAdmin is a Posgresql tools to help Database Administrator (DBA) for a make a Trigger, Function, or Rule quickly because the User just could input the parameters that important only and then the program will perform frame program automatically and can generate script Trigger/Function/Rule from posgresql database just click in table or schema. + + + + PDAdmin be make by concept and method difference by data tools for same PosgreSQL like PgAdmin, because first concept this program to help DBA for beginner or advance (in my team) to make transactional script to be use in PosgreSQL Version 7.3 like Trigger, Function or Rule easily, quick and flexible with show capability the editor. + + + + Now, we wishful to share "PDAdmin version 1.0.5" in this milist "FREE" + + + + Other features: + + -. Connection to PosgreSQL server without ODBC + + -. Update condition of trigger with choice checkbox or radio button. + + -. Available Database Explorer + + -. Shortcut to general function PostreSQL + + -. User define shortcut + + -. Block Execute Command + + -. Block Increase/Decrease Indent + + -. Export Trigger/Function/Rule from database to file + + -. Import data from Ms-Sql Server + + -. Freeware, No Limit, No Ads. + + + + Requirements: + + -. Windows 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP + + -. File Size 1150Kb + + -. Uninstaller Included: Yes + + -. Recommended: PosgreSQL 7.3.x + + + + Download: + + http://www.csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/PDASetup.exe + + + + Screenshot: + + http://www.csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/pdadmin1.jpg + + + + Regards, + + Fadjar Hamidi + + +--Boundary_(ID_bggRZKMEUU2wWlbnkurASQ) +Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 +Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable + + + + + + + + + + +
Can U please pass on the Ip of y= +our=20 +server my ISP's DNS do not have your websites entry
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
+
----- Original Message -----
+ Fro= +m:=20 + Mr.F= + + +
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 4:2= +1=20 + PM
+
Subject: [ADMIN] New Interface for= +=20 + Win
+

+
+

Hi=20 + all,

+

 

+

After two month we have bee= +n=20 + migrating from Ms-Sql Server 7 to PosgreSQL 7.3, we also build new interf= +ace=20 + to connect from client in Win base to Posgresql and it call =93PDAdmin=94= +. PDAdmin=20 + is a Posgresql tools to help Database Administrator (DBA) for a make a=20 + Trigger, Function, or Rule quickly because the User just could input the= +=20 + parameters that important only and then the program will perform frame pr= +ogram=20 + automatically and can generate script Trigger/Function/Rule from posgresq= +l=20 + database just click in table or schema.

+

 

+

PDAdmin be make by concept = +and=20 + method difference by data tools for same PosgreSQL like PgAdmin, because = +first=20 + concept this program to help DBA for beginner or advance (in my team) to = +make=20 + transactional script to be use in PosgreSQL Version 7.3 like Trigger, Fun= +ction=20 + or Rule easily, quick and flexible with show capability the editor.=20 +

+

 

+

Now, we wishful to share = +=93PDAdmin=20 + version 1.0.5=94 in this milist =93FREE=94

+

 

+

Other=20 + features:

+

-. Connection to PosgreSQL = +server=20 + without ODBC

+

-. Update condition of trig= +ger=20 + with choice checkbox or radio button.

+

-. Available Database=20 + Explorer

+

-. Shortcut to general func= +tion=20 + PostreSQL

+

-. User define=20 + shortcut

+

-. Block Execute=20 + Command

+

-. Block Increase/Decrease= +=20 + Indent

+

-. Export Trigger/Function/= +Rule=20 + from database to file

+

-. Import data from Ms-Sql= +=20 + Server

+

-. Freeware, No Limit, No= +=20 + Ads.

+

 

+

Requirements:

+

-.=20 + Windows=20 + 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP

+

-. File Size=20 + 1150Kb

+

-. Uninstaller Included:=20 + Yes

+

-. Recommended: PosgreSQL= +=20 + 7.3.x

+

 

+

Download:=20 +

+

http://www.= +csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/PDASetup.exe

+

 

+

Screenshot:

+

http://www.= +csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/pdadmin1.jpg

+

 

+

Regards,

+

Fadjar Hamidi

+ +--Boundary_(ID_bggRZKMEUU2wWlbnkurASQ)-- + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 10:00:53 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from smtp.web.de (smtp02.web.de [217.72.192.151]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9327E474E4F + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:00:49 -0500 (EST) +Received: from p508184f7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([80.129.132.247] helo=web.de) + by smtp.web.de with asmtp (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (WEB.DE(Exim) 4.97 #53) + id 18qwrb-0006o1-00 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:00:51 +0100 +Message-ID: <3E6762AA.8070206@web.de> +Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:00:58 +0100 +From: Andreas Pflug +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: How to notice column changes in trigger +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/38 +X-Sequence-Number: 1336 + +How can I detect whether a column was changed by an update command +inside a trigger? + +create table test(a int, b int, c int, primary key(a)) + +b and c should be updated inside an update trigger if not modified by +the statement itself + +1) update test set a=0 -> trigger does its work +2) update test set a=0, b=1, c=2 -> trigger does nothing +3) update test set a=0, b=b, c=c -> trigger does nothing, but content of +a and b dont change either although touched + +What I'm looking for is something like +IF NOT COLUMN_TOUCHED(b) THEN ... +For MSSQL, this would be coded as IF NOT UPDATE(b) .. + +Any hints? + +Andreas + + + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 10:25:49 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B4FB4764B6 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:25:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h26FPax6015072; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:25:36 -0500 (EST) +To: Sean Chittenden +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +In-reply-to: <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +Comments: In-reply-to Sean Chittenden + message dated "Thu, 06 Mar 2003 01:41:17 -0800" +Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 10:25:36 -0500 +Message-ID: <15071.1046964336@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/21 +X-Sequence-Number: 9264 + +Sean Chittenden writes: +> I've toyed with the idea of adding this because it is monstrously more +> efficient than select()/poll() in basically every way, shape, and +> form. + + From what I've looked at, kqueue only wins when you are watching a large +number of file descriptors at the same time; which is an operation done +nowhere in Postgres. I think the above would be a complete waste of +effort. + +> Is this one of the areas of +> PostgreSQL that just needs to get slowly migrated to use mmap() or are +> there any gaping reasons why to not use the family of system calls? + +There has been much speculation on this, and no proof that it actually +buys us anything to justify the portability hit. There would be some +nontrivial problems to solve, such as the mechanics of accessing a +large number of files from a large number of backends without running +out of virtual memory. Also, is it guaranteed that multiple backends +mmap'ing the same block will access the very same physical buffer, and +not multiple copies? Multiple copies would be fatal. See the acrhives +for more discussion. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 11:01:33 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net + [194.217.242.85]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30E5C4761BC + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:01:28 -0500 (EST) +Received: from lfix.demon.co.uk ([158.152.59.127] helo=linda.lfix.co.uk) + by anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #2) + id 18qxoJ-0005DE-0Z; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:01:31 +0000 +Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] ident=olly) + by linda.lfix.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) + id 18qxoD-0006w2-00; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:01:25 +0000 +Subject: Re: How to notice column changes in trigger +From: Oliver Elphick +To: Andreas Pflug +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +In-Reply-To: <3E6762AA.8070206@web.de> +References: <3E6762AA.8070206@web.de> +Content-Type: text/plain +Organization: LFIX Limited +Message-Id: <1046966484.20270.94.camel@linda.lfix.co.uk> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 06 Mar 2003 16:01:24 +0000 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/39 +X-Sequence-Number: 1337 + +On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 15:00, Andreas Pflug wrote: +> How can I detect whether a column was changed by an update command +> inside a trigger? +> +> create table test(a int, b int, c int, primary key(a)) +> +> b and c should be updated inside an update trigger if not modified by +> the statement itself +> +> 1) update test set a=0 -> trigger does its work +> 2) update test set a=0, b=1, c=2 -> trigger does nothing +> 3) update test set a=0, b=b, c=c -> trigger does nothing, but content of +> a and b dont change either although touched +> +> What I'm looking for is something like +> IF NOT COLUMN_TOUCHED(b) THEN ... +> For MSSQL, this would be coded as IF NOT UPDATE(b) .. + + IF NEW.b = OLD.b OR (NEW.b IS NULL AND OLD.b IS NULL) THEN + -- b has not changed + ... + END IF; + +-- +Oliver Elphick Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk +Isle of Wight, UK http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver +GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C + ======================================== + "The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I + fear? the LORD is the strength of my life; of whom + shall I be afraid?" Psalms 27:1 + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 11:09:34 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from smtp.web.de (smtp03.web.de [217.72.192.158]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83DA9476517 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:09:28 -0500 (EST) +Received: from p508184f7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([80.129.132.247] helo=web.de) + by smtp.web.de with asmtp (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (WEB.DE(Exim) 4.97 #53) + id 18qxw4-00072E-00 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 17:09:32 +0100 +Message-ID: <3E6772C4.5010005@web.de> +Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 17:09:40 +0100 +From: Andreas Pflug +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: How to notice column changes in trigger +References: <3E6762AA.8070206@web.de> + <1046966484.20270.94.camel@linda.lfix.co.uk> +In-Reply-To: <1046966484.20270.94.camel@linda.lfix.co.uk> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/40 +X-Sequence-Number: 1338 + +Oliver Elphick wrote: + +> IF NEW.b = OLD.b OR (NEW.b IS NULL AND OLD.b IS NULL) THEN +> -- b has not changed +> ... +> END IF; +> +> +This doesn't cover case 3, since UPDATE ... SET b=b will lead to NEW.b=OLD.b + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 12:06:36 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0924F47655E + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:06:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2882891; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 09:06:23 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: Andreas Pflug , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: How to notice column changes in trigger +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 09:05:37 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +References: <3E6762AA.8070206@web.de> + <1046966484.20270.94.camel@linda.lfix.co.uk> + <3E6772C4.5010005@web.de> +In-Reply-To: <3E6772C4.5010005@web.de> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +Message-Id: <200303060905.37760.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/41 +X-Sequence-Number: 1339 + +Andreas, + +> This doesn't cover case 3, since UPDATE ... SET b=b will lead to +> NEW.b=OLD.b + +Why do you care about SET b = b? + +And shouldn't this discussion be on the PGSQL-SQL list? + +-- +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 13:51:13 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com (ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com + [24.93.36.230]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6D5C476321 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 13:51:11 -0500 (EST) +Received: from spaceship.com (cs24243214-140.austin.rr.com [24.243.214.140]) + by ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h26ImKn1029954 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 13:48:21 -0500 (EST) +Message-ID: <3E67989F.7030001@spaceship.com> +Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 12:51:11 -0600 +From: Matt Mello +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3b) Gecko/20030210 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance +Subject: ISNULL performance tweaks +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/42 +X-Sequence-Number: 1340 + +I have some existing code running in a production environment with +embedded SELECTs whose WHERE's use ISNULL tests on indexed foreign key +fields. This is obviously very slow. + +My ISNULL *queries *take anywhere from 6 to 40 seconds. These queries +are used to generate reports to a device which times out at 20 seconds, +so half the time these devices don't get their reports, which makes my +customers VERY angry. + +I recall seeing an email (I believe on this list) about how to improve +performance of ISNULL's with some sort of tweak or trick. However, I +can't find that email anywhere, and couldn't find it searching the +maillist archives. + +So, until I have the time to code the fixes I need to prevent the use of +ISNULL, does anybody know how I can speed up this existing system? + +Man, I wish PG indexed nulls! Is there any plan on adding these in the +future? + +Thanks for any help you can give! + +-- +Matt Mello + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 14:03:49 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A8834764B3 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 14:03:47 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO chocolate-mousse) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2883163; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 11:03:32 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: Matt Mello , + pgsql-performance +Subject: Re: ISNULL performance tweaks +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:04:33 -0800 +X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4] +References: <3E67989F.7030001@spaceship.com> +In-Reply-To: <3E67989F.7030001@spaceship.com> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303061104.33335.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/43 +X-Sequence-Number: 1341 + + +Matt, + +> I recall seeing an email (I believe on this list) about how to improve=20 +> performance of ISNULL's with some sort of tweak or trick. However, I=20 +> can't find that email anywhere, and couldn't find it searching the=20 +> maillist archives. + +Easy. Create a partial index on NULLs: + +CREATE INDEX idx_tablename_nulls ON tablename(columname) +WHERE columname IS NULL; + +--=20 +-Josh Berkus + Aglio Database Solutions + San Francisco + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 14:11:23 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC0684764C0 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 14:11:20 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO chocolate-mousse) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2883187; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 11:11:06 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: Matt Mello , + pgsql-performance +Subject: Re: ISNULL performance tweaks +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:12:07 -0800 +X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4] +References: <3E67989F.7030001@spaceship.com> +In-Reply-To: <3E67989F.7030001@spaceship.com> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303061112.07285.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/44 +X-Sequence-Number: 1342 + + +Matt, + +> Man, I wish PG indexed nulls! Is there any plan on adding these in the= +=20 +> future? + +BTW, this is a design argument. As far as a lot of SQL-geeks are concerned= +=20 +(and I'm one of them) use of NULLs should be minimized or eliminiated=20 +entirely from well-normalized database designs. In such designs, IS NULL= +=20 +queries are used only for outer joins (where indexes don't matter) or for= +=20 +data integrity maintainence (where query speed doesn't matter).=20=20=20 + +As a result, the existing core team doesn't see this issue as a priority.= +=20=20 +What fixing it requires is a new programmer who cares enough about it to ha= +ck=20 +it. What would be really nice is the ability to create an index WITH NULLS= +,=20 +as follows: + +CREATE INDEX idx_tablename_one ON tablename(column_one) WITH NULLS; + + +--=20 +-Josh Berkus + Aglio Database Solutions + San Francisco + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 15:19:30 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (momjian.navpoint.com [207.106.42.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBBCE47634B + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 15:19:25 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from pgman@localhost) + by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) id h26KIu926973; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 15:18:56 -0500 (EST) +From: Bruce Momjian +Message-Id: <200303062018.h26KIu926973@candle.pha.pa.us> +Subject: Re: Index File growing big. +In-Reply-To: <200302271234.h1RCYCF13164@contactbda.com> +To: jim@contactbda.com +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 15:18:56 -0500 (EST) +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + Tom Lane , Andrew Sullivan , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99 (25)] +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII +X-Archive-Number: 200303/45 +X-Sequence-Number: 1343 + + +Yes, the issue was that it only had places for heap and index location, +not more generic. + +I can work with a few folks to get this done. I think it can be done in +a few stages: + + Decide on syntax/functionality + Update grammer to support it + Update system catalogs to hold information + Update storage manager to handle storage locations + +If folks can decide on the first item, I can do the second and third +ones. + +--------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +Jim Buttafuoco wrote: +> All, +> +> I was the person who submitted the patch. I tried to a generic syntax. I also tried to keep the tablespace concept +> simple. See my posting on HACKERS/GENERAL from a week or 2 ago about the syntax. I am still interested in working on +> this patch with others. I have many system here that are 500+ gigabytes and growing. It is a real pain to add more +> disk space (I have to backup, drop database(s), rebuild raid set (I am using raid 10) and reload data). +> +> Jim +> +> +> +> > > > You should note that someone already has sent in a patch for +> > tablespaces, it +> > > > hasn't been acted on though - can't quite remember why. Maybe we should +> > > > resurrect it... +> > > +> > > It's been awhile, but my recollection is that the patch had restricted +> > > functionality (which would be okay for a first cut) and it invented SQL +> > > syntax that seemed to lock us into that restricted functionality +> > > permanently (not so okay). Details are fuzzy though... +> > +> > Well, I'll resurrect it and see if it can be improved. Tablespaces seem to +> > be a requested feature these days... +> > +> > Chris +> > +> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster +> +> +> +> +> +> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate +> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your +> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly +> + +-- + Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us + pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 16:11:45 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (momjian.navpoint.com [207.106.42.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B0047639F + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:11:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from pgman@localhost) + by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) id h26LB5J03462; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:11:05 -0500 (EST) +From: Bruce Momjian +Message-Id: <200303062111.h26LB5J03462@candle.pha.pa.us> +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +In-Reply-To: <9227.1046331043@sss.pgh.pa.us> +To: Tom Lane +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:11:05 -0500 (EST) +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + daniel alvarez , Richard Huxton , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99 (25)] +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII +X-Archive-Number: 200303/46 +X-Sequence-Number: 1344 + +Tom Lane wrote: +> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" writes: +> >> As I recall, one thing people did not want was for pg_dump to plaster +> >> WITH OIDS or WITHOUT OIDS on every single CREATE TABLE, as this would +> >> pretty much destroy any shot at loading PG dumps into any other +> >> database. +> +> > Ummm...what about SERIAL columns, ALTER TABLE / SET STATS, SET STORAGE, +> > custom types, 'btree' in CREATE INDEX, SET SEARCH_PATH, '::" cast operator, +> > stored procedures, rules, etc. - how is adding WITH OIDS going to change +> > that?! +> +> It's moving in the wrong direction. We've been slowly eliminating +> unnecessary nonstandardisms in pg_dump output; this puts in a new one +> in a quite fundamental place. You could perhaps expect another DB +> to drop commands it didn't understand like SET SEARCH_PATH ... but if +> it drops all your CREATE TABLEs, you ain't got much dump left to load. + +Why was the schema path called search_path rather than schema_path? +Standards? + +-- + Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us + pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 16:13:37 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (momjian.navpoint.com [207.106.42.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B65684763BD + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:13:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from pgman@localhost) + by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) id h26LDCP03630; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:13:12 -0500 (EST) +From: Bruce Momjian +Message-Id: <200303062113.h26LDCP03630@candle.pha.pa.us> +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +In-Reply-To: <19293.1046877640@sss.pgh.pa.us> +To: Tom Lane +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:13:12 -0500 (EST) +Cc: Neil Conway , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + daniel alvarez , Richard Huxton , + PostgreSQL Performance +X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99 (25)] +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII +X-Archive-Number: 200303/47 +X-Sequence-Number: 1345 + +Tom Lane wrote: +> Neil Conway writes: +> > Rather than specifying the use of OIDs by WITH OIDS clauses for each +> > CREATE TABLE in a dump, couldn't we do it by adding a SET command that +> > toggles the 'use_oids' GUC option prior to every CREATE TABLE? +> +> Seems better than cluttering the CREATE TABLE itself with them, I guess. + +It would be good to somehow SET the use_oids GUC value on restore start, +and just use SET when the table is different than the default, but then +there is no mechanism to do that when you restore a single table. + +-- + Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us + pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 16:14:48 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB938476445 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:14:43 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h26LEXx6018206; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:14:33 -0500 (EST) +To: Bruce Momjian +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + daniel alvarez , Richard Huxton , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +In-reply-to: <200303062111.h26LB5J03462@candle.pha.pa.us> +References: <200303062111.h26LB5J03462@candle.pha.pa.us> +Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian + message dated "Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:11:05 -0500" +Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:14:33 -0500 +Message-ID: <18205.1046985273@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/48 +X-Sequence-Number: 1346 + +Bruce Momjian writes: +> Why was the schema path called search_path rather than schema_path? + +Nobody suggested anything different ... it's a bit late now ... + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 16:16:42 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (momjian.navpoint.com [207.106.42.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF6B847647B + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:16:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from pgman@localhost) + by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) id h26LGMP03992; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:16:22 -0500 (EST) +From: Bruce Momjian +Message-Id: <200303062116.h26LGMP03992@candle.pha.pa.us> +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +In-Reply-To: <18205.1046985273@sss.pgh.pa.us> +To: Tom Lane +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:16:22 -0500 (EST) +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + daniel alvarez , Richard Huxton , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99 (25)] +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII +X-Archive-Number: 200303/49 +X-Sequence-Number: 1347 + +Tom Lane wrote: +> Bruce Momjian writes: +> > Why was the schema path called search_path rather than schema_path? +> +> Nobody suggested anything different ... it's a bit late now ... + +I started to think about it when we were talking about a config_path +variable. Search path then looked confusing. :-( + +-- + Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us + pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 16:23:13 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from bob.samurai.com (bob.samurai.com [205.207.28.75]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 168D1476447 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:23:08 -0500 (EST) +Received: from DU150.N224.ResNet.QueensU.CA (DU150.N224.ResNet.QueensU.CA + [130.15.224.150]) by bob.samurai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 944CF1F2A; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:23:03 -0500 (EST) +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +From: Neil Conway +To: Bruce Momjian +Cc: Tom Lane , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + daniel alvarez , Richard Huxton , + PostgreSQL Performance +In-Reply-To: <200303062113.h26LDCP03630@candle.pha.pa.us> +References: <200303062113.h26LDCP03630@candle.pha.pa.us> +Content-Type: text/plain +Organization: +Message-Id: <1046985774.10528.57.camel@tokyo> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 06 Mar 2003 16:22:54 -0500 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/50 +X-Sequence-Number: 1348 + +On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 16:13, Bruce Momjian wrote: +> It would be good to somehow SET the use_oids GUC value on restore start, +> and just use SET when the table is different than the default, but then +> there is no mechanism to do that when you restore a single table. + +What if the default value changes? + +IMHO, running a SET per CREATE TABLE isn't too ugly... + +Cheers, + +Neil +-- +Neil Conway || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC + + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 18:35:29 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from jester.inquent.com (unknown [216.208.117.7]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBDED47647B + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:35:25 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by jester.inquent.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h26NZuhn028169; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:36:06 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rbt@rbt.ca) +Subject: Re: Write ahead logging +From: Rod Taylor +To: Matthias Meixner +Cc: Mario Weilguni , Manfred Koizar , + Postgresql Performance +In-Reply-To: <3E55E8E0.60201@dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> +References: <3E5494DA.20003@dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> + + <000b01c2d8c2$54008350$8f01c00a@icomedias.com> + <3E55E8E0.60201@dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; + boundary="=-doG/irtiL5snTvCvWKzR" +Organization: +Message-Id: <1046993755.487.86.camel@jester> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 06 Mar 2003 18:35:56 -0500 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/51 +X-Sequence-Number: 1349 + +--=-doG/irtiL5snTvCvWKzR +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +What were you using to measure the latency. Don't suppose you could +send it over. The admins locally don't like what I used to do the test +with -- they don't want to turn off write-caching for other reasons. + +On Fri, 2003-02-21 at 03:52, Matthias Meixner wrote: +> Mario Weilguni wrote: +> >>>So the question is: has anybody verified, that the log is written to d= +isk +> >>>before returning from commit? +> >> +> >>Some (or all?) IDE disks are known to lie: they report success as +> >>soon as the data have reached the drive's RAM. +> >=20 +> >=20 +> > under linux, hdparm -W can turn off the write cache of IDE disk, maybe = +you +> > should try with write-caching turned off. +>=20 +> Yes, that made a big difference. Latency went up to 25-95ms. +>=20 +> Regards, +>=20 +> Matthias Meixner +--=20 +Rod Taylor + +PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc + +--=-doG/irtiL5snTvCvWKzR +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc +Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) + +iD8DBQA+Z9tb6DETLow6vwwRAkv+AJ0T7dk6RtoZ1UNB/c2nwNHTtdtzPgCfX65I +jm5fX4T0QEG7ORaDGgaaRgY= +=/IjU +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--=-doG/irtiL5snTvCvWKzR-- + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 19:37:03 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (internal.ext.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 3120E47646F; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 19:36:58 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id 9CBE42105B; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:36:40 -0800 (PST) +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:36:40 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Tom Lane +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + pgsql-committers@postgresql.org, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Message-ID: <20030307003640.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <15071.1046964336@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HjNkcEWJ4DMx36DP" +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <15071.1046964336@sss.pgh.pa.us> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/30 +X-Sequence-Number: 9273 + +--HjNkcEWJ4DMx36DP +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +[moving to -performance, please drop -committers from replies] + +> > I've toyed with the idea of adding this because it is monstrously more +> > efficient than select()/poll() in basically every way, shape, and +> > form. +>=20 +> From what I've looked at, kqueue only wins when you are watching a +> large number of file descriptors at the same time; which is an +> operation done nowhere in Postgres. I think the above would be a +> complete waste of effort. + +It scales very well to many thousands of descriptors, but it also +works well on small numbers as well. kqueue is about 5x faster than +select() or poll() on the low end of number of fd's. As I said +earlier, I don't think there is _much_ to gain in this regard, but I +do think that it would be a speed improvement but only to one OS +supported by PostgreSQL. I think that there are bigger speed +improvements to be had elsewhere in the code. + +> > Is this one of the areas of PostgreSQL that just needs to get +> > slowly migrated to use mmap() or are there any gaping reasons why +> > to not use the family of system calls? +>=20 +> There has been much speculation on this, and no proof that it +> actually buys us anything to justify the portability hit. + +Actually, I think that it wouldn't be that big of a portability hit +because you still would read() and write() as always, but in +performance sensitive areas, an #ifdef HAVE_MMAP section would have +the appropriate mmap() calls. If the system doesn't have mmap(), +there isn't much to loose and we're in the same position we're in now. + +> There would be some nontrivial problems to solve, such as the +> mechanics of accessing a large number of files from a large number +> of backends without running out of virtual memory. Also, is it +> guaranteed that multiple backends mmap'ing the same block will +> access the very same physical buffer, and not multiple copies? +> Multiple copies would be fatal. See the acrhives for more +> discussion. + +Have read through the archives. Making a call to madvise() will speed +up access to the pages as it gives hints to the VM about what order +the pages are accessed/used. Here are a few bits from the BSD mmap() +and madvise() man pages: + +mmap(2): + MAP_NOSYNC Causes data dirtied via this VM map to be flushed to + physical media only when necessary (usually by the + pager) rather then gratuitously. Typically this pre- + vents the update daemons from flushing pages dirtied + through such maps and thus allows efficient sharing = +of + memory across unassociated processes using a file- + backed shared memory map. Without this option any VM + pages you dirty may be flushed to disk every so often + (every 30-60 seconds usually) which can create perfo= +r- + mance problems if you do not need that to occur (such + as when you are using shared file-backed mmap regions + for IPC purposes). Note that VM/filesystem coherency + is maintained whether you use MAP_NOSYNC or not. Th= +is + option is not portable across UNIX platforms (yet), + though some may implement the same behavior by defau= +lt. + + WARNING! Extending a file with ftruncate(2), thus c= +re- + ating a big hole, and then filling the hole by modif= +y- + ing a shared mmap() can lead to severe file fragment= +a- + tion. In order to avoid such fragmentation you shou= +ld + always pre-allocate the file's backing store by + write()ing zero's into the newly extended area prior= + to + modifying the area via your mmap(). The fragmentati= +on + problem is especially sensitive to MAP_NOSYNC pages, + because pages may be flushed to disk in a totally ra= +n- + dom order. + + The same applies when using MAP_NOSYNC to implement a + file-based shared memory store. It is recommended t= +hat + you create the backing store by write()ing zero's to + the backing file rather then ftruncate()ing it. You + can test file fragmentation by observing the KB/t + (kilobytes per transfer) results from an ``iostat 1'' + while reading a large file sequentially, e.g. using + ``dd if=3Dfilename of=3D/dev/null bs=3D32k''. + + The fsync(2) function will flush all dirty data and + metadata associated with a file, including dirty NOS= +YNC + VM data, to physical media. The sync(8) command and + sync(2) system call generally do not flush dirty NOS= +YNC + VM data. The msync(2) system call is obsolete since + BSD implements a coherent filesystem buffer cache. + However, it may be used to associate dirty VM pages + with filesystem buffers and thus cause them to be + flushed to physical media sooner rather then later. + +madvise(2): + MADV_NORMAL Tells the system to revert to the default paging beha= +v- + ior. + + MADV_RANDOM Is a hint that pages will be accessed randomly, and + prefetching is likely not advantageous. + + MADV_SEQUENTIAL Causes the VM system to depress the priority of pages + immediately preceding a given page when it is faulted + in. + +mprotect(2): + The mprotect() system call changes the specified pages to have protect= +ion + prot. Not all implementations will guarantee protection on a page bas= +is; + the granularity of protection changes may be as large as an entire + region. A region is the virtual address space defined by the start and + end addresses of a struct vm_map_entry. + + Currently these protection bits are known, which can be combined, OR'd + together: + + PROT_NONE No permissions at all. + + PROT_READ The pages can be read. + + PROT_WRITE The pages can be written. + + PROT_EXEC The pages can be executed. + +msync(2): + The msync() system call writes any modified pages back to the filesyst= +em + and updates the file modification time. If len is 0, all modified pag= +es + within the region containing addr will be flushed; if len is non-zero, + only those pages containing addr and len-1 succeeding locations will be + examined. The flags argument may be specified as follows: + + MS_ASYNC Return immediately + MS_SYNC Perform synchronous writes + MS_INVALIDATE Invalidate all cached data + + +A few thoughts come to mind: + +1) backends could share buffers by mmap()'ing shared regions of data. + While I haven't seen any numbers to reflect this, I'd wager that + mmap() is a faster interface than ipc. + +2) It looks like while there are various file IO schemes scattered all + over the place, the bulk of the critical routines that would need + to be updated are in backend/storage/file/fd.c, more specifically: + + *) fileNameOpenFile() would need the appropriate mmap() call made + to it. + + *) FileTruncate() would need some attention to avoid fragmentation. + + *) a new "sync" GUC would have to be introduced to handle msync + (affects only pg_fsync() and pg_fdatasync()). + +3) There's a bit of code in pgsql/src/backend/storage/smgr that could + be gutted/removed. Which of those storage types are even used any + more? There's a reference in the code to PostgreSQL 3.0. :) + +And I think that'd be it. The LRU code could be used if necessary to +help manage the amount of mmap()'ed in the VM at any one time, at the +very least that could be a handled by a shm var that various backends +would increment/decrement as files are open()'ed/close()'ed. + +I didn't spend too long looking at this, but I _think_ that'd cover +80% of PostgreSQL's disk access needs. The next bit to possibly add +would be passing a flag on FileOpen operations that'd act as a hint to +madvise() that way the VM could proactively react to PostgreSQL's +needs. + +I don't have my copy of Steven's handy (it's some 700mi away atm +otherwise I'd cite it), but if Tom or someone else has it handy, look +up the example re: the performance gain from read()'ing an mmap()'ed +file versus a non-mmap()'ed file. The difference is non-trivial and +_WELL_ worth the time given the speed increase. The same speed +benefit held true for writes as well, iirc. It's been a while, but I +think it was around page 330. The index has it listed and it's not +that hard of an example to find. -sc + +--=20 +Sean Chittenden + +--HjNkcEWJ4DMx36DP +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature +Content-Disposition: inline + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Comment: Sean Chittenden + +iD8DBQE+Z+mY3ZnjH7yEs0ERAjVkAJwMI1V7+HvMAA5ODadD5znsekI8TQCgvH0C +KwvG7YLsJ+xpsTUS67KD+4M= +=w8/7 +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--HjNkcEWJ4DMx36DP-- + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 19:47:56 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from bob.samurai.com (bob.samurai.com [205.207.28.75]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22EA447638C + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 19:47:54 -0500 (EST) +Received: from DU150.N224.ResNet.QueensU.CA (DU150.N224.ResNet.QueensU.CA + [130.15.224.150]) by bob.samurai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id CF93F1F27; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 19:47:56 -0500 (EST) +Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +From: Neil Conway +To: Sean Chittenden +Cc: Tom Lane , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + PostgreSQL Performance +In-Reply-To: <20030307003640.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <15071.1046964336@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030307003640.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +Content-Type: text/plain +Organization: +Message-Id: <1046998072.10527.67.camel@tokyo> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 06 Mar 2003 19:47:52 -0500 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/53 +X-Sequence-Number: 1351 + +On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 19:36, Sean Chittenden wrote: +> I don't have my copy of Steven's handy (it's some 700mi away atm +> otherwise I'd cite it), but if Tom or someone else has it handy, look +> up the example re: the performance gain from read()'ing an mmap()'ed +> file versus a non-mmap()'ed file. The difference is non-trivial and +> _WELL_ worth the time given the speed increase. + +Can anyone confirm this? If so, one easy step we could take in this +direction would be adapting COPY FROM to use mmap(). + +Cheers, + +Neil + +-- +Neil Conway || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC + + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 6 20:51:19 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (momjian.navpoint.com [207.106.42.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2803E476368 + for ; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 20:51:15 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from pgman@localhost) + by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) id h271oaW02436; + Thu, 6 Mar 2003 20:50:36 -0500 (EST) +From: Bruce Momjian +Message-Id: <200303070150.h271oaW02436@candle.pha.pa.us> +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +In-Reply-To: <1046985774.10528.57.camel@tokyo> +To: Neil Conway +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 20:50:36 -0500 (EST) +Cc: Tom Lane , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + daniel alvarez , Richard Huxton , + PostgreSQL Performance +X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99 (25)] +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII +X-Archive-Number: 200303/54 +X-Sequence-Number: 1352 + +Neil Conway wrote: +> On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 16:13, Bruce Momjian wrote: +> > It would be good to somehow SET the use_oids GUC value on restore start, +> > and just use SET when the table is different than the default, but then +> > there is no mechanism to do that when you restore a single table. +> +> What if the default value changes? +> +> IMHO, running a SET per CREATE TABLE isn't too ugly... + +Not ugly, but a little noisy. However, my idea of having a single SET +at the top is never going to work, so I don't have a better idea. + +The killer for me is that you are never going to know the GUC default +when you are loading, so we are _always_ going to have that SET for each +table. + +I suppose we could set the default to off, and set it ON in the dump +only when we want OID. If they set GUC to on, they will get oid's from +the load, but it will cut down on the cruft and over time, they will +only have the SET for cases where they really want an oid. + +-- + Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us + pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 + +From pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 00:37:58 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org +Received: from ndl1mr1-a-fixed (ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in [61.0.0.45]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 56FBE47655D; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 00:37:43 -0500 (EST) +Received: from conversion-daemon.ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in by + ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in + (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 0.9 (built Jul 29 2002)) + id <0HBD00A015UCBP@ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in>; Fri, + 07 Mar 2003 11:07:47 +0530 (IST) +Received: from societykotla ([61.0.95.125]) by ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in + (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 0.9 (built Jul 29 2002)) + with ESMTPA id <0HBD001M76APHN@ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in>; Fri, + 07 Mar 2003 11:07:47 +0530 (IST) +Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 11:03:14 +0530 +From: Aspire Something +Subject: Re: New Interface for Win +To: php-db , + PG Performance , + pgsql-novice , + Pg Admin +Reply-To: Aspire Something +Message-id: <002a01c2e46c$33a5cce0$c9c832c0@societykotla> +MIME-version: 1.0 +X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 +Content-type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="Boundary_(ID_hByawvmqD/DPphgpYdxaXQ)" +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-priority: Normal +References: <000201c2e3ce$5702bac0$de00a8c0@fhf> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/55 +X-Sequence-Number: 7703 + +This is a multi-part message in MIME format. + +--Boundary_(ID_hByawvmqD/DPphgpYdxaXQ) +Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 +Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT + +Hi all PostgreSQL users, + +I would recomend PDAdmin. It's a great tool for windows user it has, +1. Good interface +2. Support for Creating functions and Trgers and MORE >>> +What it avoid is the dirty interface of PGadmin2 +It's nearly equivilant to the EMS Postgresql Tool. + +Give it a try + +V Kashyap + + ----- Original Message ----- + From: Mr.F + To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org + Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 4:21 PM + Subject: [ADMIN] New Interface for Win + + + Hi all, + + + + After two month we have been migrating from Ms-Sql Server 7 to PosgreSQL 7.3, we also build new interface to connect from client in Win base to Posgresql and it call "PDAdmin". PDAdmin is a Posgresql tools to help Database Administrator (DBA) for a make a Trigger, Function, or Rule quickly because the User just could input the parameters that important only and then the program will perform frame program automatically and can generate script Trigger/Function/Rule from posgresql database just click in table or schema. + + + + PDAdmin be make by concept and method difference by data tools for same PosgreSQL like PgAdmin, because first concept this program to help DBA for beginner or advance (in my team) to make transactional script to be use in PosgreSQL Version 7.3 like Trigger, Function or Rule easily, quick and flexible with show capability the editor. + + + + Now, we wishful to share "PDAdmin version 1.0.5" in this milist "FREE" + + + + Other features: + + -. Connection to PosgreSQL server without ODBC + + -. Update condition of trigger with choice checkbox or radio button. + + -. Available Database Explorer + + -. Shortcut to general function PostreSQL + + -. User define shortcut + + -. Block Execute Command + + -. Block Increase/Decrease Indent + + -. Export Trigger/Function/Rule from database to file + + -. Import data from Ms-Sql Server + + -. Freeware, No Limit, No Ads. + + + + Requirements: + + -. Windows 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP + + -. File Size 1150Kb + + -. Uninstaller Included: Yes + + -. Recommended: PosgreSQL 7.3.x + + + + Download: + + http://www.csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/PDASetup.exe + + + + Screenshot: + + http://www.csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/pdadmin1.jpg + + + + Regards, + + Fadjar Hamidi + + +--Boundary_(ID_hByawvmqD/DPphgpYdxaXQ) +Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 +Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable + + + + + + + + + + +
Hi all PostgreSQL users,<= +/DIV> +
 
+
I would recomend PDAdmin. It's a= + great=20 +tool for windows user it has,
+
1. Good interface
+
2. Support for Creating function= +s and=20 +Trgers and MORE >>>
+
What it avoid is  the dirty interface of=20 +PGadmin2
+
It's nearly equivilant to the EM= +S=20 +Postgresql Tool.
+
 
+
Give it a try
+
 
+
V Kashyap
+
 
+
+
----- Original Message -----
+ Fro= +m:=20 + Mr.F= +
+ +
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 4:2= +1=20 + PM
+
Subject: [ADMIN] New Interface for= +=20 + Win
+

+
+

Hi=20 + all,

+

 

+

After two month we have bee= +n=20 + migrating from Ms-Sql Server 7 to PosgreSQL 7.3, we also build new interf= +ace=20 + to connect from client in Win base to Posgresql and it call =93PDAdmin=94= +. PDAdmin=20 + is a Posgresql tools to help Database Administrator (DBA) for a make a=20 + Trigger, Function, or Rule quickly because the User just could input the= +=20 + parameters that important only and then the program will perform frame pr= +ogram=20 + automatically and can generate script Trigger/Function/Rule from posgresq= +l=20 + database just click in table or schema.

+

 

+

PDAdmin be make by concept = +and=20 + method difference by data tools for same PosgreSQL like PgAdmin, because = +first=20 + concept this program to help DBA for beginner or advance (in my team) to = +make=20 + transactional script to be use in PosgreSQL Version 7.3 like Trigger, Fun= +ction=20 + or Rule easily, quick and flexible with show capability the editor.=20 +

+

 

+

Now, we wishful to share = +=93PDAdmin=20 + version 1.0.5=94 in this milist =93FREE=94

+

 

+

Other=20 + features:

+

-. Connection to PosgreSQL = +server=20 + without ODBC

+

-. Update condition of trig= +ger=20 + with choice checkbox or radio button.

+

-. Available Database=20 + Explorer

+

-. Shortcut to general func= +tion=20 + PostreSQL

+

-. User define=20 + shortcut

+

-. Block Execute=20 + Command

+

-. Block Increase/Decrease= +=20 + Indent

+

-. Export Trigger/Function/= +Rule=20 + from database to file

+

-. Import data from Ms-Sql= +=20 + Server

+

-. Freeware, No Limit, No= +=20 + Ads.

+

 

+

Requirements:

+

-.=20 + Windows=20 + 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP

+

-. File Size=20 + 1150Kb

+

-. Uninstaller Included:=20 + Yes

+

-. Recommended: PosgreSQL= +=20 + 7.3.x

+

 

+

Download:=20 +

+

http://www.= +csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/PDASetup.exe

+

 

+

Screenshot:

+

http://www.= +csahome.com/download/PDAdmin/pdadmin1.jpg

+

 

+

Regards,

+

Fadjar Hamidi

+ +--Boundary_(ID_hByawvmqD/DPphgpYdxaXQ)-- + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 01:05:50 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (internal.ext.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F16034768E2 + for ; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 01:04:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id 7969A21065; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:04:12 -0800 (PST) +Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:04:12 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Neil Conway +Cc: Tom Lane , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + PostgreSQL Performance +Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Message-ID: <20030307060412.GA19138@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <15071.1046964336@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030307003640.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <1046998072.10527.67.camel@tokyo> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KsGdsel6WgEHnImy" +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <1046998072.10527.67.camel@tokyo> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/56 +X-Sequence-Number: 1354 + +--KsGdsel6WgEHnImy +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +> > I don't have my copy of Steven's handy (it's some 700mi away atm +> > otherwise I'd cite it), but if Tom or someone else has it handy, look +> > up the example re: the performance gain from read()'ing an mmap()'ed +> > file versus a non-mmap()'ed file. The difference is non-trivial and +> > _WELL_ worth the time given the speed increase. +>=20 +> Can anyone confirm this? If so, one easy step we could take in this +> direction would be adapting COPY FROM to use mmap(). + +Weeee! Alright, so I got to have some fun writing out some simple +tests with mmap() and friends tonight. Are the results interesting? +Absolutely! Is this a simple benchmark? Yup. Do I think it +simulates PostgreSQL? Eh, not particularly. Does it demonstrate that +mmap() is a win and something worth implementing? I sure hope so. Is +this a test program to demonstrate the ideal use of mmap() in +PostgreSQL? No. Is it a place to start a factual discussion? I hope +so. + +I have here four tests that are conditionalized by cpp. + +# The first one uses read() and write() but with the buffer size set +# to the same size as the file. +gcc -O3 -finline-functions -fkeep-inline-functions -funroll-loops -o test-= +mmap test-mmap.c +/usr/bin/time ./test-mmap > /dev/null +Beginning tests with file: services + +Page size: 4096 +File read size is the same as the file size +Number of iterations: 100000 +Start time: 1047013002.412516 +Time: 82.88178 + +Completed tests + 82.09 real 2.13 user 68.98 sys + +# The second one uses read() and write() with the default buffer size: +# 65536 +gcc -O3 -finline-functions -fkeep-inline-functions -funroll-loops -DDEFAUL= +T_READSIZE=3D1 -o test-mmap test-mmap.c +/usr/bin/time ./test-mmap > /dev/null +Beginning tests with file: services + +Page size: 4096 +File read size is default read size: 65536 +Number of iterations: 100000 +Start time: 1047013085.16204 +Time: 18.155511 + +Completed tests + 18.16 real 0.90 user 14.79 sys +# Please note this is significantly faster, but that's expected + +# The third test uses mmap() + madvise() + write() +gcc -O3 -finline-functions -fkeep-inline-functions -funroll-loops -DDEFAUL= +T_READSIZE=3D1 -DDO_MMAP=3D1 -o test-mmap test-mmap.c +/usr/bin/time ./test-mmap > /dev/null +Beginning tests with file: services + +Page size: 4096 +File read size is the same as the file size +Number of iterations: 100000 +Start time: 1047013103.859818 +Time: 8.4294203644 + +Completed tests + 7.24 real 0.41 user 5.92 sys +# Faster still, and twice as fast as the normal read() case + +# The last test only calls mmap()'s once when the file is opened and +# only msync()'s, munmap()'s, close()'s the file once at exit. +gcc -O3 -finline-functions -fkeep-inline-functions -funroll-loops -DDEFAUL= +T_READSIZE=3D1 -DDO_MMAP=3D1 -DDO_MMAP_ONCE=3D1 -o test-mmap test-mmap.c +/usr/bin/time ./test-mmap > /dev/null +Beginning tests with file: services + +Page size: 4096 +File read size is the same as the file size +Number of iterations: 100000 +Start time: 1047013111.623712 +Time: 1.174076 + +Completed tests + 1.18 real 0.09 user 0.92 sys +# Substantially faster + + +Obviously this isn't perfect, but reading and writing data is faster +(specifically moving pages through the VM/OS). Doing partial writes +from mmap()'ed data should be faster along with scanning through +mmap()'ed portions of - or completely mmap()'ed - files because the +pages are already loaded in the VM. PostgreSQL's LRU file descriptor +cache could easily be adjusted to add mmap()'ing of frequently +accessed files (specifically, system catalogs come to mind). It's not +hard to figure out how often particular files are accessed and to +either _avoid_ mmap()'ing a file that isn't accessed often, or to +mmap() files that _are_ accessed often. mmap() does have a cost, but +I'd wager that mmap()'ing the same file a second or third time from a +different process would be more efficient. The speedup of searching +through an mmap()'ed file may be worth it, however, to mmap() all +files if the system is under a tunable resource limit +(max_mmaped_bytes?). + +If someone is so inclined or there's enough interest, I can reverse +this test case so that data is written to an mmap()'ed file, but the +same performance difference should hold true (assuming this isn't a +write to a tape drive ::grin::). + +The URL for the program used to generate the above tests is at: + +http://people.freebsd.org/~seanc/mmap_test/ + + +Please ask if you have questions. -sc + +--=20 +Sean Chittenden + +--KsGdsel6WgEHnImy +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature +Content-Disposition: inline + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Comment: Sean Chittenden + +iD8DBQE+aDZc3ZnjH7yEs0ERAid6AJ9/TAYMUx2+ZcD2680OlKJBj5FzrACgquIG +PBNCzM0OegBXrPROJ/uIKDM= +=y7O6 +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--KsGdsel6WgEHnImy-- + +From pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 01:46:38 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org +Received: from 127.0.0.1 (unknown [61.5.117.33]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6EC1F476375 + for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 01:46:29 -0500 (EST) +From: "Mr.F" +To: "'Pg Admin'" , + "'Aspire Something'" +Subject: Re: New Interface for Win +Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:47:32 +0700 +Message-ID: <000c01c2e475$6d9baa60$de00a8c0@fhf> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2E4B0.19FA8260" +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 +In-Reply-To: <002a01c2e46c$33a5cce0$c9c832c0@societykotla> +Importance: Normal +X-GCMulti: 1 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/56 +X-Sequence-Number: 7704 + +This is a multi-part message in MIME format. + +------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2E4B0.19FA8260 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit + +Thanks for your support specially for publishing PDAdmin to the +posgresql users. +Please send me email if you have any idea or advice to make it better. + +Regards, +Fadjar Hamidi + +Another URL to download: http://www.geocities.com/fadjarh + + +-----Original Message----- +From: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org +[mailto:pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Aspire Something +Sent: 07 Maret 2003 12:33 +To: php-db; PG Performance; pgsql-novice; Pg Admin +Subject: Re: [ADMIN] New Interface for Win + +Hi all PostgreSQL users, + +I would recomend PDAdmin. It's a great tool for windows user it has, +1. Good interface +2. Support for Creating functions and Trgers and MORE >>> +What it avoid is the dirty interface of PGadmin2 +It's nearly equivilant to the EMS Postgresql Tool. + +Give it a try + +V Kashyap + + +------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2E4B0.19FA8260 +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ +

Thanks for your support specially for = +publishing +PDAdmin to the posgresql users.

+ +

Please send me email if you have any i= +dea +or advice to make it better.

+ +

 

+ +

Regards,

+ +

Fadjar Hamidi= +

+ +

 

+ +

Another URL to download: http://www.geocities.com/fadjarh<= +/a>

+ +

 

+ +

 

+ +

-----Original Message-----
+From: +pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org] = +On Behalf Of Aspire Something
+Sent: 07 Maret 2003 <= +/font>12:33
+To: php-db; PG Performance; +pgsql-novice; Pg Admin
+Subject: Re: [ADMIN] New Int= +erface +for Win

+ +

 = +

+ +
+ +

Hi all PostgreSQL us= +ers,

+ +
+ +
+ +

 = +

+ +
+ +
+ +

I would recomend PDA= +dmin. +It's a great tool for windows user it has,

+ +
+ +
+ +

1. Good interface

+ +
+ +
+ +

2. Support for Creat= +ing +functions and Trgers and MORE >>>

+ +
+ +
+ +

What it avoid is&nbs= +p; the +dirty interface of PGadmin2

+ +
+ +
+ +

It's nearly equivila= +nt to +the EMS Postgresql Tool.

+ +
+ +
+ +

 = +

+ +
+ +
+ +

Give it a try

+ +
+ +
+ +

 = +

+ +
+ +
+ +

V Kashyap

+ +
+ +
+ +

 

+ +
+ +
+ + + + + +------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2E4B0.19FA8260-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 03:44:48 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mailserver1.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de + (mailserver1.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de [130.83.126.41]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AA694760CC + for ; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 03:44:42 -0500 (EST) +Received: from paris (paris.dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de [130.83.27.43]) + by mailserver1.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id + h278iNEq004951; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:44:24 +0100 +Received: from dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de (bali [130.83.27.100]) + by paris (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 2949FFF05; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:44:23 +0100 (MET) +Message-ID: <3E685BE6.4090008@dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> +Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 09:44:22 +0100 +From: Matthias Meixner +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 +X-Accept-Language: de, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Rod Taylor +Cc: Mario Weilguni , Manfred Koizar , + Postgresql Performance +Subject: Re: Write ahead logging +References: <3E5494DA.20003@dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> + + <000b01c2d8c2$54008350$8f01c00a@icomedias.com> + <3E55E8E0.60201@dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> + <1046993755.487.86.camel@jester> +In-Reply-To: <1046993755.487.86.camel@jester> +X-Enigmail-Version: 0.71.0.0 +X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +X-MailScanner: Found to be clean +X-Archive-Number: 200303/57 +X-Sequence-Number: 1355 + +Rod Taylor wrote: +> What were you using to measure the latency. Don't suppose you could +> send it over. The admins locally don't like what I used to do the test +> with -- they don't want to turn off write-caching for other reasons. + +I am doing an insert of few bytes, so that the amount of data does not +significantly affect the measured time. And for measuring time without +cache, I temporarily switched it off. + +That was the code used (nothing unusual): + +#include "timeval.h" + +main() +{ + Timeval start,end; +EXEC SQL WHENEVER sqlerror sqlprint; +EXEC SQL WHENEVER not found sqlprint; + +EXEC SQL CONNECT TO user@localhost; + start=Timeval::Time(); +EXEC SQL BEGIN; +EXEC SQL INSERT INTO test values ('qwertz'); +EXEC SQL COMMIT; + end=Timeval::Time(); + end-=start; + printf("time: %d.%06d\n",end.tv_sec,end.tv_usec); +} + + +- Matthias Meixner + +-- +Matthias Meixner meixner@informatik.tu-darmstadt.de +Technische Universit�t Darmstadt +Datenbanken und Verteilte Systeme Telefon (+49) 6151 16 6232 +Wilhelminenstra�e 7, D-64283 Darmstadt, Germany Fax (+49) 6151 16 6229 + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 09:29:52 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4847E475F53 + for ; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:29:49 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h27ETkx6029934; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:29:46 -0500 (EST) +To: Sean Chittenden +Cc: Neil Conway , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + PostgreSQL Performance +Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +In-reply-to: <20030307060412.GA19138@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <15071.1046964336@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030307003640.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <1046998072.10527.67.camel@tokyo> + <20030307060412.GA19138@perrin.int.nxad.com> +Comments: In-reply-to Sean Chittenden + message dated "Thu, 06 Mar 2003 22:04:12 -0800" +Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 09:29:46 -0500 +Message-ID: <29933.1047047386@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/58 +X-Sequence-Number: 1356 + +Sean Chittenden writes: +> Absolutely! Is this a simple benchmark? Yup. Do I think it +> simulates PostgreSQL? Eh, not particularly. + +This would be on what OS? What hardware? What size test file? +Do the "iterations" mean so many reads of the entire file, or +so many buffer-sized read requests? Did the mmap case actually +*read* anything, or just map and unmap the file? + +Also, what did you do to normalize for the effects of the test file +being already in kernel disk cache after the first test? + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 16:09:56 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from pd2mo3so.prod.shaw.ca (shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net + [24.71.223.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A58F247622E + for ; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 16:09:53 -0500 (EST) +Received: from pd3mr3so.prod.shaw.ca (pd3mr3so-ser.prod.shaw.ca + [10.0.141.179]) + by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.8 (built May 12 + 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HBE00CJZDGIZ6@l-daemon> for + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Fri, 07 Mar 2003 14:09:54 -0700 (MST) +Received: from pn2ml2so.prod.shaw.ca + (pn2ml2so-qfe0.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.121.146]) by l-daemon + (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.8 (built May 12 2002)) + with ESMTP id <0HBE00DFMDGIK6@l-daemon> for + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Fri, 07 Mar 2003 14:09:54 -0700 (MST) +Received: from power ([24.80.229.122]) + by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.8 (built May 12 + 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HBE00K9BDGIBJ@l-daemon> for + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Fri, 07 Mar 2003 14:09:54 -0700 (MST) +Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 13:21:09 -0800 +From: Daniel Bruce Lynes +Subject: Stored Procedures and compiling +To: PostgreSQL Performance +Message-id: <200303071321.09981.dlynes@shaw.ca> +MIME-version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4] +Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 +Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT +X-Archive-Number: 200303/59 +X-Sequence-Number: 1357 + +Hello. + +I am curious if there is any planned support for full stored procedure +compiling? I've seen that PostgreSQL does not compile the SQL code inside +plpgsql code. It is merely interpreted when the procedure gets called. This +is also documented in the main html documentation. + +What I am wondering specifically is if stored procedure compiling will work +similar to Oracle's stored procedure compilation in the future? + +Thanks + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 16:46:54 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (internal.ext.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 913B5474E44 + for ; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 16:46:50 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id A55392105B; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:46:30 -0800 (PST) +Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:46:30 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Tom Lane +Cc: Neil Conway , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + PostgreSQL Performance +Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Message-ID: <20030307214630.GI79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <15071.1046964336@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030307003640.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <1046998072.10527.67.camel@tokyo> + <20030307060412.GA19138@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <29933.1047047386@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="TALVG7vV++YnpwZG" +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <29933.1047047386@sss.pgh.pa.us> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/60 +X-Sequence-Number: 1358 + +--TALVG7vV++YnpwZG +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +> > Absolutely! Is this a simple benchmark? Yup. Do I think it +> > simulates PostgreSQL? Eh, not particularly. + +I think quite a few of these Q's would have been answered by reading +the code/Makefile.... + +> This would be on what OS? + +FreeBSD, but it shouldn't matter. Any reasonably written VM should +have similar numbers (though BSD is generally regarded as having the +best VM, which, I think Linux poached not that long ago, iirc +::grimace::). + +> What hardware? + +My ultra-pathetic laptop with some fine - overly-noisy and can hardly +buildworld - IDE drives. + +> What size test file? + +In this case, only 72K. I've just updated the test program to use an +array of files though. + +> Do the "iterations" mean so many reads of the entire file, or so +> many buffer-sized read requests? + +In some cases, yes. With the file mmap()'ed, sorta. One of the test +cases (the one that did it in ~8s), mmap()'ed and munmap()'ed the file +every iteration and was twice as fast as the vanilla read() call. + +> Did the mmap case actually *read* anything, or just map and unmap +> the file? + +Nope, read it and wrote it out to stdout (which was redirected to +/dev/null). + +> Also, what did you do to normalize for the effects of the test file +> being already in kernel disk cache after the first test? + +That honestly doesn't matter too much since I wasn't testing the rate +of reading in files from my hard drive, only the OS's ability to +read/write pages of data around. In any case, I've updated my test +case to iterate through an array of files instead of just reading in a +copy of /etc/services. My laptop is generally a poor benchmark for +disk read performance given it takes 8hrs to buildworld, over 12hrs to +build mozilla, 18 for KDE, and about 48hrs for Open Office. :) +Someone with faster disks may want to try this and report back, but it +doesn't matter much in terms of relevancy for considering the benefits +of mmap(). The point is that there are calls that can be used that +substantially speed up read()'s and write()'s by allowing the VM to +align pages of data and give hints about its usage. For the sake of +argument re: the previously done tests, I'll reverse the order in +which I ran them and I bet dime to dollar that the times will be +identical. + +% make = + ~/open_source/mmap_test +cp -f /etc/services ./services +gcc -O3 -finline-functions -fkeep-inline-functions -funroll-loops -DDEFAUL= +T_READSIZE=3D1 -DDO_MMAP=3D1 -DDO_MMAP_ONCE=3D1 -o mmap-test mmap-test.c +/usr/bin/time ./mmap-test > /dev/null +Beginning tests with file: services + +Page size: 4096 +File read size is the same as the file size +Number of iterations: 100000 +Start time: 1047064672.276544 +Time: 1.281477 + +Completed tests + 1.29 real 0.10 user 0.92 sys +gcc -O3 -finline-functions -fkeep-inline-functions -funroll-loops -DDEFAUL= +T_READSIZE=3D1 -DDO_MMAP=3D1 -o mmap-test mmap-test.c +/usr/bin/time ./mmap-test > /dev/null +Beginning tests with file: services + +Page size: 4096 +File read size is the same as the file size +Number of iterations: 100000 +Start time: 1047064674.266191 +Time: 7.486622 + +Completed tests + 7.49 real 0.41 user 6.01 sys +gcc -O3 -finline-functions -fkeep-inline-functions -funroll-loops -DDEFAUL= +T_READSIZE=3D1 -o mmap-test mmap-test.c +/usr/bin/time ./mmap-test > /dev/null +Beginning tests with file: services + +Page size: 4096 +File read size is default read size: 65536 +Number of iterations: 100000 +Start time: 1047064682.288637 +Time: 19.35214 + +Completed tests + 19.04 real 0.88 user 15.43 sys +gcc -O3 -finline-functions -fkeep-inline-functions -funroll-loops -o mmap-= +test mmap-test.c +/usr/bin/time ./mmap-test > /dev/null +Beginning tests with file: services + +Page size: 4096 +File read size is the same as the file size +Number of iterations: 100000 +Start time: 1047064701.867031 +Time: 82.4294540875 + +Completed tests + 81.57 real 2.10 user 69.55 sys + + +Here's the updated test that iterates through. Ooh! One better, the +files I've used are actual data files from ~pgsql. The new benchmark +iterates through the list of files and and calls bench() once for each +file and restarts at the first file after reaching the end of its +list (ARGV). + +Whoa, if these tests are even close to real world, then we at the very +least should be mmap()'ing the file every time we read it (assuming +we're reading more than just a handful of bytes): + +find /usr/local/pgsql/data -type f | /usr/bin/xargs /usr/bin/time ./mmap-te= +st > /dev/null +Page size: 4096 +File read size is the same as the file size +Number of iterations: 100000 +Start time: 1047071143.463360 +Time: 12.109530 + +Completed tests + 12.11 real 0.36 user 6.80 sys + +find /usr/local/pgsql/data -type f | /usr/bin/xargs /usr/bin/time ./mmap-te= +st > /dev/null +Page size: 4096 +File read size is default read size: 65536 +Number of iterations: 100000 +.... [been waiting here for >40min now....] + + +Ah well, if these tests finish this century, I'll post the results in +a bit, but it's pretty clearly a win. In terms of the data that I'm +copying, I'm copying ~700MB of data from my test DB on my laptop. I +only have 256MB of RAM so I can pretty much promise you that the data +isn't in my system buffers. If anyone else would like to run the +tests or look at the results, please check it out: + +o1 and o2 should be the only targets used if FILES is bigger than the +RAM on the system. o3's by far and away the fastest, but only in rare +cases will a DBA have more RAM than data. But, as mentioned earlier, +the LRU cache could easily be modified to munmap() infrequently +accessed files to keep the size of mmap()'ed data down to a reasonable +level. + +The updated test programs are at: + +http://people.FreeBSD.org/~seanc/mmap_test/ + +-sc + +--=20 +Sean Chittenden + +--TALVG7vV++YnpwZG +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature +Content-Disposition: inline + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Comment: Sean Chittenden + +iD8DBQE+aRM23ZnjH7yEs0ERAoqhAKCFgmhpvNMqe9tucoFvK1H6J50z2QCeIZEI +mgBHwu/H1pe1sXIX9UG2V+I= +=cFRQ +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--TALVG7vV++YnpwZG-- + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 19:15:47 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from OLYMPIA.breakwater.net (mail.breakwater.net [198.202.150.6]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED366474E44 + for ; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 19:15:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: by OLYMPIA.breakwater.net with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) + id ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 16:15:42 -0800 +Message-ID: <3D6F4C287380B1419D7427E111FA3207C68863@OLYMPIA.breakwater.net> +From: Lucas Adamski +To: "Postgresql Performance Mailing list (E-mail)" + +Subject: Index / Performance issues +Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 16:15:42 -0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2E507.DAF007F4" +X-Archive-Number: 200303/61 +X-Sequence-Number: 1359 + +This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand +this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E507.DAF007F4 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="ISO-8859-1" + +Hi all, + +I've been using pgsql heavily for about 2 years now, and I keep running into +some index-related wierdness that's rather puzzling. This is for release +7.2.1, so if a more recent release has solved these, great! Never the less: + +I have a table with about 170,000 rows, each of them a network event. I +also have a serial 8 primary key set up, with a corresponding (unique) btree +index. The primary key is basically sequential, being incremented +dynamically at insert time. The problems I've had revolve around selecting +an individual entry, or trying to figure out the current maximum ID in the +table. In both cases, the results are rather counter-intuitive. Example +below, with my comments in bold. +I've had this problem using functions such as max(), etc. For example: + +Obvious way, using max(): + +# explain analyze select max(my_e_id) from my_events; +Aggregate (cost=68132.85..68132.85 rows=1 width=8) (actual +time=16103.03..16103.03 rows=1 loops=1) + -> Seq Scan on my_events (cost=0.00..67699.28 rows=173428 width=8) +(actual time=0.09..15932.27 rows=173480 loops=1) +Total runtime: 16103.11 msec + +Obtuse way, using ORDER BY DESC/LIMIT + +# explain analyze select my_e_id from sn_events ORDER BY my_e_id DESC LIMIT +1; +Limit (cost=0.00..1.48 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=36.02..36.03 rows=1 +loops=1) + -> Index Scan Backward using my_events_pkey on my_events +(cost=0.00..256931.94 rows=173428 width=8) (actual time=36.02..36.02 rows=2 +loops= +1) +Total runtime: 36.09 msec + +In this case, the obtuse way is faster... 446 times faster, in fact. I'd +understand if this was a corner cases, but this has been the situation with +ever PGSQL db I've built. + +Here's another example, just trying to pick out a single random entry out of +a 170,000. +First, the simple approach (status quo): + +# explain analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id = 10800000; + +Seq Scan on my_events (cost=0.00..68132.85 rows=1 width=771) (actual +time=15916.75..16337.31 rows=1 loops=1) +Total runtime: 16337.42 msec + +Pretty darned slow.. (16 secs in fact, ouch). So now lets try our idea with +limiting the query by order it in reverse order, and limiting to 1 result +(even though the limit is unnecessary, but performance is identical without +it) + +# explain analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id = 10800000 ORDER BY +my_e_id DESC LIMIT 1; +Limit (cost=68132.86..68132.86 rows=1 width=771) (actual +time=16442.42..16442.43 rows=1 loops=1) + -> Sort (cost=68132.86..68132.86 rows=1 width=771) (actual +time=16442.42..16442.42 rows=1 loops=1) + -> Seq Scan on my_events (cost=0.00..68132.85 rows=1 width=771) +(actual time=16009.50..16441.91 rows=1 loops=1) +Total runtime: 16442.70 msec + +Well, that's not any better... over a few runs, sometimes this was even +slower that the status quo. Well, at this point there was only one thing +left to try... put in a <= in place of =, and see if it made a difference. + +# explain analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id <= 10800000 ORDER BY +my_e_id DESC LIMIT 1; +Limit (cost=0.00..5.52 rows=1 width=771) (actual time=474.40..474.42 rows=1 +loops=1) + -> Index Scan Backward using my_events_pkey on my_events +(cost=0.00..257365.51 rows=46663 width=771) (actual time=474.39..474.41 +rows=2 loo +ps=1) +Total runtime: 474.55 msec + +Oddly enough, it did... note the "Index Scan Backward"... finally! So for +whatever reason, the DB decides not to use an index scan unless there's a +greater or less than comparison operator in conjunction with an ORDER +BY/LIMIT. Now it takes half a second, instead of 16. + +# explain analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id >= 10800000 ORDER BY +my_e_id LIMIT 1; +Limit (cost=0.00..2.03 rows=1 width=771) (actual time=1379.74..1379.76 +rows=1 loops=1) + -> Index Scan using my_events_pkey on my_events (cost=0.00..257365.51 +rows=126765 width=771) (actual time=1379.73..1379.75 rows=2 loops=1) +Total runtime: 1380.10 msec + +Just for fun, run it in regular order (front to back, versus back to front, +looking for >=). Sure enough, still far better than the scan... 1.4 seconds +vs 16. So even the worst case index scan is still far better than the +default approach. Note that I tried using "set enable_seqscan=off", and it +STILL insisted on scanning the table, but even slower this time. + +Am I missing something really obvious? Is there a proven way to +consistantly encourage it to use indexes for these sorts of (rather obvious) +queries? + +Several runs of the above resulted in some variations in run time, but the +corresponding orders of difference performance stayed pretty consistant. +I'm just confused as to why I have to go through such convoluted methods to +force it to use the index when its obviously a FAR more efficient route to +go regardless of which order it scans it in (forwards or backwards). Any +thoughts are appreciated. Thanks! + + Lucas. + + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E507.DAF007F4 +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="ISO-8859-1" + + + + + + + + +
Hi +all,
+
 
+
I've been using +pgsql heavily for about 2 years now, and I keep running into some index-related +wierdness that's rather puzzling.  This is for release 7.2.1, so if a more +recent release has solved these, great!  Never the +less:
+
 
+
I have a table with +about 170,000 rows, each of them a network event.  I also have a serial 8 +primary key set up, with a corresponding (unique) btree index.  The primary +key is basically sequential, being incremented dynamically at insert time.  +The problems I've had revolve around selecting an individual entry, or trying to +figure out the current maximum ID in the table.  In both cases, the results +are rather counter-intuitive.  Example below, with my comments in +bold.
+
+

I've had this problem using functions such as +max(), etc.  For example:

+

Obvious way, using +max():

+

# explain analyze select max(my_e_id) from +my_events;
Aggregate  (cost=68132.85..68132.85 rows=1 +width=8) (actual time=16103.03..16103.03 rows=1 loops=1)
  ->  +Seq Scan on my_events  (cost=0.00..67699.28 rows=173428 width=8) (actual +time=0.09..15932.27 rows=173480 loops=1)
Total runtime: 16103.11 +msec

+

Obtuse way, using ORDER BY +DESC/LIMIT

+

# explain analyze select my_e_id from sn_events ORDER +BY my_e_id DESC LIMIT 1;
Limit  (cost=0.00..1.48 rows=1 +width=8) (actual time=36.02..36.03 rows=1 loops=1)
  ->  Index +Scan Backward using my_events_pkey on my_events  (cost=0.00..256931.94 +rows=173428 width=8) (actual time=36.02..36.02 rows=2 loops=
1)
Total +runtime: 36.09 msec

In this case, the obtuse way is faster... +446 times faster, in fact.  I'd understand if this was a corner cases, but +this has been the situation with ever PGSQL db I've +built.

+

Here's another example, just trying +to pick out a single random entry out of a 170,000. 
First, the simple +approach (status quo):

+
+

# explain +analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id = +10800000;                                                                     +
Seq Scan on +my_events  (cost=0.00..68132.85 rows=1 width=771) (actual +time=15916.75..16337.31 rows=1 loops=1)
Total runtime: 16337.42 +msec

+

Pretty darned slow.. (16 +secs in fact, ouch).  So now lets try +our idea with limiting the query by order it in reverse order, and limiting to 1 +result (even though the limit is unnecessary, but performance is +identical without it)

+

# explain +analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id = 10800000 ORDER BY my_e_id DESC +LIMIT 1;
Limit  +(cost=68132.86..68132.86 rows=1 width=771) (actual time=16442.42..16442.43 +rows=1 loops=1)
  ->  Sort  (cost=68132.86..68132.86 rows=1 +width=771) (actual time=16442.42..16442.42 rows=1 +loops=1)
        ->  Seq Scan on +my_events  (cost=0.00..68132.85 rows=1 width=771) (actual +time=16009.50..16441.91 rows=1 loops=1)
Total runtime: 16442.70 +msec

+

Well, that's not any +better... over a few runs, sometimes this was even slower that the status +quo.  Well, at this point there was only one thing left to try... put in a +<= in place of =, and see if it made a +difference.

+

# explain +analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id <= 10800000 ORDER BY my_e_id +DESC LIMIT 1;
Limit  (cost=0.00..5.52 rows=1 +width=771) (actual time=474.40..474.42 rows=1 loops=1)
  ->  +Index Scan Backward using my_events_pkey on my_events  +(cost=0.00..257365.51 rows=46663 width=771) (actual time=474.39..474.41 rows=2 +loo
ps=1)
Total runtime: 474.55 msec

+

Oddly enough, it did... note the +"Index Scan Backward"... finally!  So for whatever reason, the DB decides +not to use an index scan unless there's a greater or less than comparison +operator in conjunction with an ORDER BY/LIMIT.  Now it takes half a +second, instead of 16.

+

# explain +analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id >= 10800000 ORDER BY my_e_id +LIMIT 1;
Limit  (cost=0.00..2.03 rows=1 +width=771) (actual time=1379.74..1379.76 rows=1 loops=1)
  ->  +Index Scan using my_events_pkey on my_events  (cost=0.00..257365.51 +rows=126765 width=771) (actual time=1379.73..1379.75 rows=2 loops=1)
Total +runtime: 1380.10 msec

+

Just for fun, run it in +regular order (front to back, versus back to front, looking for >=).  +Sure enough, still far better than the scan... 1.4 seconds vs 16.  So even the worst case index scan is still far +better than the default approach.  Note that I tried using "set +enable_seqscan=off", and it STILL insisted on scanning the table, but even +slower this time.

+

Am I missing something really obvious?  Is there a +proven way to consistantly encourage it to use indexes for these sorts of +(rather obvious) queries?

+

Several runs of the above resulted in some variations +in run time, but the corresponding orders of difference +performance stayed pretty +consistant.  I'm just confused as to why I have to go through such +convoluted methods to force it to use the index when its obviously a FAR more +efficient route to go regardless of which order it scans it in (forwards or +backwards).  Any thoughts are appreciated.  +Thanks!

+

  +Lucas.

+ +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E507.DAF007F4-- + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 19:34:35 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mail1.ihs.com (mail1.ihs.com [170.207.70.222]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81171474E44 + for ; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 19:34:32 -0500 (EST) +Received: from css120.ihs.com (css120.ihs.com [170.207.105.120]) + by mail1.ihs.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h280Wb8T018118; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 17:32:37 -0700 (MST) +Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 17:33:26 -0700 (MST) +From: "scott.marlowe" +To: Lucas Adamski +Cc: "Postgresql Performance Mailing list (E-mail)" + +Subject: Re: Index / Performance issues +In-Reply-To: <3D6F4C287380B1419D7427E111FA3207C68863@OLYMPIA.breakwater.net> +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-MailScanner: Found to be clean +X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: +X-Archive-Number: 200303/62 +X-Sequence-Number: 1360 + +Hi Lucas, you are running into two fairly common postgresql tuning issues. + +When you run max(), you are literally asking the database to look at every +value and find the highest one. while 'select max(field) from table' +seems like a simple one to optimize, how about 'select max(field) from +table where id<=800000 and size='m' isn't so obivious anymore. As the +max() queries get more complex, the ability to optimize them quickly +disappears. + +Things get more complex in a multi-user environment, where different folks +can see different things. While the limit offset solution seems like a +hack, it is actually asking the question in a more easily optimized way. + +The second problem you're running into is that postgresql doesn't +automatically match int8 to int4, and it assumes ints without '' around +them are int4. the easy solution is to enclose your id number inside '' +marks, so you have : + +select * from table where 8bitintfield='123456789'; + +and that will force the planner to convert your number to int8. + +On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Lucas Adamski wrote: + +> Hi all, +> +> I've been using pgsql heavily for about 2 years now, and I keep running into +> some index-related wierdness that's rather puzzling. This is for release +> 7.2.1, so if a more recent release has solved these, great! Never the less: +> +> I have a table with about 170,000 rows, each of them a network event. I +> also have a serial 8 primary key set up, with a corresponding (unique) btree +> index. The primary key is basically sequential, being incremented +> dynamically at insert time. The problems I've had revolve around selecting +> an individual entry, or trying to figure out the current maximum ID in the +> table. In both cases, the results are rather counter-intuitive. Example +> below, with my comments in bold. +> I've had this problem using functions such as max(), etc. For example: +> +> Obvious way, using max(): +> +> # explain analyze select max(my_e_id) from my_events; +> Aggregate (cost=68132.85..68132.85 rows=1 width=8) (actual +> time=16103.03..16103.03 rows=1 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on my_events (cost=0.00..67699.28 rows=173428 width=8) +> (actual time=0.09..15932.27 rows=173480 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 16103.11 msec +> +> Obtuse way, using ORDER BY DESC/LIMIT +> +> # explain analyze select my_e_id from sn_events ORDER BY my_e_id DESC LIMIT +> 1; +> Limit (cost=0.00..1.48 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=36.02..36.03 rows=1 +> loops=1) +> -> Index Scan Backward using my_events_pkey on my_events +> (cost=0.00..256931.94 rows=173428 width=8) (actual time=36.02..36.02 rows=2 +> loops= +> 1) +> Total runtime: 36.09 msec +> +> In this case, the obtuse way is faster... 446 times faster, in fact. I'd +> understand if this was a corner cases, but this has been the situation with +> ever PGSQL db I've built. +> +> Here's another example, just trying to pick out a single random entry out of +> a 170,000. +> First, the simple approach (status quo): "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> +> +> # explain analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id = 10800000; +> +> Seq Scan on my_events (cost=0.00..68132.85 rows=1 width=771) (actual +> time=15916.75..16337.31 rows=1 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 16337.42 msec +> +> Pretty darned slow.. (16 secs in fact, ouch). So now lets try our idea with +> limiting the query by order it in reverse order, and limiting to 1 result +> (even though the limit is unnecessary, but performance is identical without +> it) +> +> # explain analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id = 10800000 ORDER BY +> my_e_id DESC LIMIT 1; +> Limit (cost=68132.86..68132.86 rows=1 width=771) (actual +> time=16442.42..16442.43 rows=1 loops=1) +> -> Sort (cost=68132.86..68132.86 rows=1 width=771) (actual +> time=16442.42..16442.42 rows=1 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on my_events (cost=0.00..68132.85 rows=1 width=771) +> (actual time=16009.50..16441.91 rows=1 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 16442.70 msec +> +> Well, that's not any better... over a few runs, sometimes this was even +> slower that the status quo. Well, at this point there was only one thing +> left to try... put in a <= in place of =, and see if it made a difference. +> +> # explain analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id <= 10800000 ORDER BY +> my_e_id DESC LIMIT 1; +> Limit (cost=0.00..5.52 rows=1 width=771) (actual time=474.40..474.42 rows=1 +> loops=1) +> -> Index Scan Backward using my_events_pkey on my_events +> (cost=0.00..257365.51 rows=46663 width=771) (actual time=474.39..474.41 +> rows=2 loo +> ps=1) +> Total runtime: 474.55 msec +> +> Oddly enough, it did... note the "Index Scan Backward"... finally! So for +> whatever reason, the DB decides not to use an index scan unless there's a +> greater or less than comparison operator in conjunction with an ORDER +> BY/LIMIT. Now it takes half a second, instead of 16. +> +> # explain analyze select * from my_events WHERE my_e_id >= 10800000 ORDER BY +> my_e_id LIMIT 1; +> Limit (cost=0.00..2.03 rows=1 width=771) (actual time=1379.74..1379.76 +> rows=1 loops=1) +> -> Index Scan using my_events_pkey on my_events (cost=0.00..257365.51 +> rows=126765 width=771) (actual time=1379.73..1379.75 rows=2 loops=1) +> Total runtime: 1380.10 msec +> +> Just for fun, run it in regular order (front to back, versus back to front, +> looking for >=). Sure enough, still far better than the scan... 1.4 seconds +> vs 16. So even the worst case index scan is still far better than the +> default approach. Note that I tried using "set enable_seqscan=off", and it +> STILL insisted on scanning the table, but even slower this time. +> +> Am I missing something really obvious? Is there a proven way to +> consistantly encourage it to use indexes for these sorts of (rather obvious) +> queries? +> +> Several runs of the above resulted in some variations in run time, but the +> corresponding orders of difference performance stayed pretty consistant. +> I'm just confused as to why I have to go through such convoluted methods to +> force it to use the index when its obviously a FAR more efficient route to +> go regardless of which order it scans it in (forwards or backwards). Any +> thoughts are appreciated. Thanks! +> +> Lucas. +> +> + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 21:39:13 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sabre.velocet.net (sabre.velocet.net [216.138.209.205]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CE95474E44 + for ; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 21:39:12 -0500 (EST) +Received: from stark.dyndns.tv (H162.C233.tor.velocet.net [216.138.233.162]) + by sabre.velocet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP + id BB4BE13809E; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 21:39:09 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=stark.dyndns.tv ident=foobar) + by stark.dyndns.tv with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) + id 18rUEv-0002Ib-00; Fri, 07 Mar 2003 21:39:09 -0500 +To: "scott.marlowe" +Cc: Lucas Adamski , + "Postgresql Performance Mailing list (E-mail)" + +Subject: Re: Index / Performance issues +References: +In-Reply-To: +From: Greg Stark +Organization: The Emacs Conspiracy; member since 1992 +Date: 07 Mar 2003 21:39:09 -0500 +Message-ID: <877kbalgz6.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Lines: 15 +User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Archive-Number: 200303/63 +X-Sequence-Number: 1361 + + + +"scott.marlowe" writes: + +> select * from table where 8bitintfield='123456789'; + +Or: + +select * from table where 8bitintfield=123456789::int8 + + +I'm not sure which is aesthetically more pleasing. + +-- +greg + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 7 22:13:23 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B5ED474E44 + for ; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 22:13:21 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h283DOub003241; + Fri, 7 Mar 2003 22:13:25 -0500 (EST) +To: Daniel Bruce Lynes +Cc: PostgreSQL Performance +Subject: Re: Stored Procedures and compiling +In-reply-to: <200303071321.09981.dlynes@shaw.ca> +References: <200303071321.09981.dlynes@shaw.ca> +Comments: In-reply-to Daniel Bruce Lynes + message dated "Fri, 07 Mar 2003 13:21:09 -0800" +Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 22:13:24 -0500 +Message-ID: <3240.1047093204@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/64 +X-Sequence-Number: 1362 + +Daniel Bruce Lynes writes: +> I am curious if there is any planned support for full stored procedure +> compiling? I've seen that PostgreSQL does not compile the SQL code inside +> plpgsql code. It is merely interpreted when the procedure gets called. This +> is also documented in the main html documentation. +> What I am wondering specifically is if stored procedure compiling will work +> similar to Oracle's stored procedure compilation in the future? + +What exactly do you consider "compiling", and why do you think that +whatever Oracle does (which you didn't bother to explain) is superior +to what plpgsql does? + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 8 05:15:49 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from email05.aon.at (WARSL401PIP4.highway.telekom.at [195.3.96.79]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9074C475921 + for ; + Sat, 8 Mar 2003 05:15:47 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 411826 invoked from network); 8 Mar 2003 10:15:39 -0000 +Received: from m156p025.dipool.highway.telekom.at (HELO cantor) + ([62.46.9.121]) (envelope-sender ) + by qmail5rs.highway.telekom.at (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP + for ; 8 Mar 2003 10:15:39 -0000 +From: Manfred Koizar +To: "Paul McKay" +Cc: +Subject: Re: Slow query performance on large table +Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 11:15:56 +0100 +Message-ID: <2agj6vc16t42rar0hou13e0e2qcplqe9rj@4ax.com> +References: <3E64E079.8050807@klaster.net> + <000001c2e2fc$4a13c200$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +In-Reply-To: <000001c2e2fc$4a13c200$0c64a8c0@paulspc> +X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/65 +X-Sequence-Number: 1363 + +On Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:47:51 -0000, "Paul McKay" + wrote: +>Hash Join (cost=1532.83..345460.73 rows=75115 width=23) (actual +>time=1769.84..66687.11 rows=16094 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on measurement (cost=0.00..336706.07 rows=418859 +>width=15) (actual time=1280.11..59985.47 rows=455788 loops=1) +> -> Hash (cost=1498.21..1498.21 rows=13848 width=8) (actual +>time=253.49..253.49 rows=0 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on panconversation (cost=0.00..1498.21 rows=13848 +>width=8) (actual time=15.64..223.18 rows=13475 loops=1) +>Total runtime: 66694.82 msec + +|clearview=# select count(*) from measurement; +| 15302138 +|clearview=# select count(*) from panconversation; +| 77217 +Paul, + +you seem to have a lot of dead tuples in your tables. + + VACUUM FULL VERBOSE ANALYZE panconversation; + VACUUM FULL VERBOSE ANALYZE measurement; + +This should cut your query time to ca. one third. If you could +migrate to 7.3 and create your tables WITHOUT OIDS, I'd expect a +further speed increase of ~ 15%. + +Servus + Manfred + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 8 13:22:39 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from pd4mo2so.prod.shaw.ca (shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net + [24.71.223.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C06475CA9 + for ; + Sat, 8 Mar 2003 13:22:37 -0500 (EST) +Received: from pd5mr2so.prod.shaw.ca + (pd5mr2so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.233]) by l-daemon + (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.8 (built May 12 2002)) + with ESMTP id <0HBG00MK40DPV2@l-daemon> for + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Sat, 08 Mar 2003 11:22:37 -0700 (MST) +Received: from pn2ml8so.prod.shaw.ca + (pn2ml8so-qfe0.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.121.152]) by l-daemon + (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.8 (built May 12 2002)) + with ESMTP id <0HBG00LNE0DPQN@l-daemon> for + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Sat, 08 Mar 2003 11:22:37 -0700 (MST) +Received: from power ([24.80.229.122]) + by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.8 (built May 12 + 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HBG002KH0DOJJ@l-daemon> for + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Sat, 08 Mar 2003 11:22:37 -0700 (MST) +Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 10:34:01 -0800 +From: Daniel Bruce Lynes +Subject: Re: Stored Procedures and compiling +In-reply-to: <3240.1047093204@sss.pgh.pa.us> +To: PostgreSQL Performance +Message-id: <200303081034.01935.dlynes@shaw.ca> +MIME-version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4] +Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 +Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT +References: <200303071321.09981.dlynes@shaw.ca> + <3240.1047093204@sss.pgh.pa.us> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/66 +X-Sequence-Number: 1364 + +On Friday 07 March 2003 19:13, Tom Lane wrote: + +> What exactly do you consider "compiling", and why do you think that +> whatever Oracle does (which you didn't bother to explain) is superior +> to what plpgsql does? + +When you run a script to place a stored procedure into Oracle, it checks the +entire script to ensure that there are no syntax errors in both the +procedural code and the SQL code. However, with PostgreSQL, if there are +errors in the code, I usually don't find out about it until I reach that +branch in the logic upon execution of the stored procedure from client code. + +As I understand it, Oracle also compiles the stored procedure into pcode +(internally), the first time it is called so that it runs faster. You can +compile stored procedures into pcode manually also, and store the pcode in +the database, rather than the pl/sql code. + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 8 15:01:34 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mx0.gmx.net (mx0.gmx.net [213.165.64.100]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1CA414758C9 + for ; + Sat, 8 Mar 2003 15:01:32 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 11849 invoked by uid 0); 8 Mar 2003 20:01:32 -0000 +Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 21:01:32 +0100 (MET) +From: daniel alvarez +To: Bruce Momjian +Cc: neilc@samurai.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, + chriskl@familyhealth.com.au, dev@archonet.com, + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +MIME-Version: 1.0 +References: <200303070150.h271oaW02436@candle.pha.pa.us> +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-Authenticated-Sender: #0002681999@gmx.net +X-Authenticated-IP: [217.185.184.254] +Message-ID: <26462.1047153692@www68.gmx.net> +X-Mailer: WWW-Mail 1.6 (Global Message Exchange) +X-Flags: 0001 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/67 +X-Sequence-Number: 1365 + +> Neil Conway wrote: +> > On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 16:13, Bruce Momjian wrote: +> > > It would be good to somehow SET the use_oids GUC value on restore +> start, +> > > and just use SET when the table is different than the default, but +> then +> > > there is no mechanism to do that when you restore a single table. +> > +> > What if the default value changes? +> > +> > IMHO, running a SET per CREATE TABLE isn't too ugly... +> +> Not ugly, but a little noisy. However, my idea of having a single SET +> at the top is never going to work, so I don't have a better idea. + +Why isn't this done on a per-session basis? Having a session setting for the +common case and a CREATE-TABLE clause for the specifics sounds natural. + +When a single table needs to be restored all one needs to to is changing the +session setting before running the CREATE command. The alternative clause +in CREATE-TABLE statements would be used as a cleaner way of expressing +the same thing without affecting the session, when the statement's text can +be entered manually (as opposed to loading it from an existing dumpfile). + +The default for the session setting could be set in the configuration file +then. + +regards, Daniel Alvarez Arribas + + +-- ++++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ +Bitte l�cheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage! + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 8 15:09:37 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD472475EE2 + for ; + Sat, 8 Mar 2003 15:09:35 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h28K9Fub010511; + Sat, 8 Mar 2003 15:09:15 -0500 (EST) +To: daniel alvarez +Cc: Bruce Momjian , neilc@samurai.com, + chriskl@familyhealth.com.au, dev@archonet.com, + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +In-reply-to: <26462.1047153692@www68.gmx.net> +References: <200303070150.h271oaW02436@candle.pha.pa.us> + <26462.1047153692@www68.gmx.net> +Comments: In-reply-to daniel alvarez + message dated "Sat, 08 Mar 2003 21:01:32 +0100" +Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 15:09:15 -0500 +Message-ID: <10510.1047154155@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/68 +X-Sequence-Number: 1366 + +daniel alvarez writes: +>> Not ugly, but a little noisy. However, my idea of having a single SET +>> at the top is never going to work, so I don't have a better idea. + +> Why isn't this done on a per-session basis? + +Because pg_dump can't know what the session default will be when the +dump is reloaded. The scheme you are proposing will only succeed in +making pg_dump unreliable. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 8 15:16:35 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mx0.gmx.net (mx0.gmx.net [213.165.64.100]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9EBD3474E42 + for ; + Sat, 8 Mar 2003 15:16:32 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 22581 invoked by uid 0); 8 Mar 2003 20:16:32 -0000 +Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 21:16:32 +0100 (MET) +From: daniel alvarez +To: Tom Lane +Cc: pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, neilc@samurai.com, + chriskl@familyhealth.com.au, dev@archonet.com, + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +MIME-Version: 1.0 +References: <10510.1047154155@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-Authenticated-Sender: #0002681999@gmx.net +X-Authenticated-IP: [217.185.184.254] +Message-ID: <19376.1047154592@www68.gmx.net> +X-Mailer: WWW-Mail 1.6 (Global Message Exchange) +X-Flags: 0001 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/69 +X-Sequence-Number: 1367 + +> daniel alvarez writes: +> >> Not ugly, but a little noisy. However, my idea of having a single SET +> >> at the top is never going to work, so I don't have a better idea. +> +> > Why isn't this done on a per-session basis? +> +> Because pg_dump can't know what the session default will be when the +> dump is reloaded. The scheme you are proposing will only succeed in +> making pg_dump unreliable. + +Ouch. Why is this? Doesn't it read the config because of portability +reasons? + +-- ++++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ +Bitte l�cheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage! + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 11:05:52 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (momjian.navpoint.com [207.106.42.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61FD5475C15 + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:05:50 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from pgman@localhost) + by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) id h2AG5La28728; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:05:21 -0500 (EST) +From: Bruce Momjian +Message-Id: <200303101605.h2AG5La28728@candle.pha.pa.us> +Subject: Re: OIDs as keys +In-Reply-To: <19376.1047154592@www68.gmx.net> +To: daniel alvarez +Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:05:21 -0500 (EST) +Cc: Tom Lane , neilc@samurai.com, + chriskl@familyhealth.com.au, dev@archonet.com, + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99 (25)] +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII +X-Archive-Number: 200303/70 +X-Sequence-Number: 1368 + +daniel alvarez wrote: +> > daniel alvarez writes: +> > >> Not ugly, but a little noisy. However, my idea of having a single SET +> > >> at the top is never going to work, so I don't have a better idea. +> > +> > > Why isn't this done on a per-session basis? +> > +> > Because pg_dump can't know what the session default will be when the +> > dump is reloaded. The scheme you are proposing will only succeed in +> > making pg_dump unreliable. +> +> Ouch. Why is this? Doesn't it read the config because of portability +> reasons? + +Remember the dump output is just an SQL script, so there is no 'logic' +in the script, and it can be loaded right into psql. + +-- + Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us + pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 11:56:23 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mail1.ihs.com (mail1.ihs.com [170.207.70.222]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E77A74760E3 + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:56:20 -0500 (EST) +Received: from css120.ihs.com (css120.ihs.com [170.207.105.120]) + by mail1.ihs.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2AGtQ8T015701; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 09:55:26 -0700 (MST) +Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 09:55:53 -0700 (MST) +From: "scott.marlowe" +To: Greg Stark +Cc: Lucas Adamski , + "Postgresql Performance Mailing list (E-mail)" + +Subject: Re: Index / Performance issues +In-Reply-To: <877kbalgz6.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-MailScanner: Found to be clean +X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: +X-Archive-Number: 200303/71 +X-Sequence-Number: 1369 + +On 7 Mar 2003, Greg Stark wrote: + +> +> +> "scott.marlowe" writes: +> +> > select * from table where 8bitintfield='123456789'; +> +> Or: +> +> select * from table where 8bitintfield=123456789::int8 +> +> +> I'm not sure which is aesthetically more pleasing. + +The cast is self documenting, so it's probably a better choice for most +setups. On the other hand, it's not as likely to be portable. + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 13:57:24 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mailrelay (technicacorp.com [216.181.29.134]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCC4D4768F9 + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 13:55:02 -0500 (EST) +thread-index: AcLnNnfFrWGYq6kSSF6KqZb0roRZow== +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Received: from WWWSERVER.technicacorp.com ([216.181.29.149]) by mailrelay with + Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 10 Mar 2003 13:54:23 -0500 +Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message +Importance: normal +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +Received: by wwwserver with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) id ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 13:58:27 -0500 +Message-ID: <71F044551C53974EB0735B3737EFE2FC088628@wwwserver> +From: "Scott Buchan" +To: +Subject: Large difference between elapsed time and run time for queries +Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 13:58:26 -0500 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2E737.08116350" +X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Mar 2003 18:54:23.0136 (UTC) + FILETIME=[770C9A00:01C2E736] +X-Archive-Number: 200303/72 +X-Sequence-Number: 1370 + +This is a multi-part message in MIME format. + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E737.08116350 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" + +Hello, + + + +While running benchmarks for my database, I am seeing a large difference in +the elapsed time (from stats collected in the logs) and run time (running +explain analyze on the query using ./psql ) for each of my +queries. The database is being ran on a sunfire 880 with 4 750mhz +processors with 8 G RAM running solaris 8 + + + +I am simulating 200 user connections each running 6 select queries on 1 +indexed table with 50,000 records. The elapsed time for the queries average +around 2.5 seconds while if I run the query using explain analyze while the +test is running, the run time is around 300 ms although it takes much longer +(few seconds) to display the results. If I reduce the number of concurrent +connections to 100 then the run time and elapsed time for the queries are +the same. + + + +I have tried numerous configurations in the postgresql.conf file. I have +set the shared_buffers with values ranging from 75 MB to 4000MB with no +luck. I have also tried increasing the sort_mem with no luck. + + + + + +When the test is running, the cpu is well over 50% idle and iostat shows +that the processes are not waiting for i/o and disk usage percentage is low. + + + +Any help would be appreciated. + + + +Thanks. + + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E737.08116350 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="iso-8859-1" + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ +

Hello,

+ +

 

+ +

While running benchmarks for my database, I am seeing a +large difference in the elapsed time (from stats collected in the logs) and run +time (running explain analyze on the query using ./psql <database>) for +each of my queries.  The database is being ran on a sunfire 880 with 4 750mhz +processors with 8 G RAM running solaris 8

+ +

 

+ +

I am simulating 200 user connections each running 6 select +queries on 1 indexed table with 50,000 records. The elapsed time for the +queries average around 2.5 seconds while if I run the query using explain +analyze while the test is running, the run time is around 300 ms although it +takes much longer (few seconds) to display the results.  If I reduce the +number of concurrent connections to 100 then the run time and elapsed time for +the queries are the same.

+ +

 

+ +

I have tried numerous configurations in the postgresql.conf +file.  I have set the shared_buffers with values ranging from 75 MB to 4000MB +with no luck.  I have also tried increasing the sort_mem with no luck.

+ +

 

+ +

 

+ +

When the test is running, the cpu is well over 50% idle and iostat shows +that the processes are not waiting for i/o and disk usage percentage is low.

+ +

 

+ +

Any help would be appreciated.

+ +

 

+ +

Thanks.

+ +
+ + + + + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E737.08116350-- + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 15:07:55 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B479475FC8 + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:07:54 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2AK7sub019605; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:07:55 -0500 (EST) +To: "Scott Buchan" +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Large difference between elapsed time and run time for queries +In-reply-to: <71F044551C53974EB0735B3737EFE2FC088628@wwwserver> +References: <71F044551C53974EB0735B3737EFE2FC088628@wwwserver> +Comments: In-reply-to "Scott Buchan" + message dated "Mon, 10 Mar 2003 13:58:26 -0500" +Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:07:54 -0500 +Message-ID: <19604.1047326874@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/73 +X-Sequence-Number: 1371 + +"Scott Buchan" writes: +> I am simulating 200 user connections each running 6 select queries on 1 +> indexed table with 50,000 records. The elapsed time for the queries average +> around 2.5 seconds while if I run the query using explain analyze while the +> test is running, the run time is around 300 ms although it takes much longer +> (few seconds) to display the results. + +How many rows are these queries returning? AFAICS the differential must +be the cost of transmitting the data to the frontend, which of course +does not happen when you use explain analyze. (I think, but am not +completely sure, that explain analyze also suppresses the CPU effort of +converting the data to text form, as would normally be done before +transmitting it. But given that you don't see a problem at 100 +connections, that's probably not where the issue lies.) + +> The database is being ran on a sunfire 880 with 4 750mhz +> processors with 8 G RAM running solaris 8 + +We have seen some other weird performance problems on Solaris (their +standard qsort apparently is very bad, for example). Might be that you +need to be looking at kernel behavior, not at Postgres. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 21:51:06 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from hub.org (unknown [64.117.224.146]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4421C475FC6 + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 21:51:04 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [64.117.224.146] (unknown [64.117.224.146]) + by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 23FD5103ADAD; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:51:02 -0400 (AST) +Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:50:59 -0400 (AST) +From: "Marc G. Fournier" +To: Sean Chittenden +Cc: Tom Lane , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +In-Reply-To: <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +Message-ID: <20030310224706.T35660@hub.org> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-Archive-Number: 200303/57 +X-Sequence-Number: 9300 + +yOn Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Sean Chittenden wrote: + +> > >>> Has anyone ever thought about adding kqueue (for *BSD) support to +> > >>> Postgres, instead of using select? +> > >> +> > >> Why? poll() is standard. kqueue isn't, AFAIK. +> > +> > > It's supposed be a whole heap faster - there is no polling involved... +> > +> > Supposed by whom? Faster than what? And how would it not poll? +> > +> > The way libpq uses this call, it's either probing for current status +> > (timeout=0) or it's willing to block, possibly indefinitely, until the +> > desired condition arises. It does not sit there in a busy-wait loop. +> > I can't see any reason to think that an OS-specific API would give +> > any marked difference in performance. +> +> Heh, kqueue is _the_ reason to use FreeBSD. +> +> http://www.kegel.com/dkftpbench/Poller_bench.html#results +> +> I've toyed with the idea of adding this because it is monstrously more +> efficient than select()/poll() in basically every way, shape, and +> form. + +I would personally be interested in seeing patches ... what would be +involved? + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 22:44:33 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from filer (12-234-86-219.client.attbi.com [12.234.86.219]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB2947592C + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:44:32 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (uid 1000) + by filer with local; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 19:44:36 -0800 +Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 19:44:36 -0800 +From: Kevin Brown +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Index / Performance issues +Message-ID: <20030311034436.GG1847@filer> +Mail-Followup-To: Kevin Brown , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +References: <877kbalgz6.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> + +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +Organization: Frobozzco International +X-Archive-Number: 200303/74 +X-Sequence-Number: 1372 + +scott.marlowe wrote: +> > select * from table where 8bitintfield=123456789::int8 +> > +> > +> > I'm not sure which is aesthetically more pleasing. +> +> The cast is self documenting, so it's probably a better choice for most +> setups. On the other hand, it's not as likely to be portable. + +May as well make it as portable as possible, though: + +select * from table where 8bitintfield = CAST(123456789 AS bigint) + + + +-- +Kevin Brown kevin@sysexperts.com + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 23:12:06 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (internal.ext.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35F547592C + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:12:05 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id B90FF21068; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:11:33 -0800 (PST) +Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:11:33 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: "Marc G. Fournier" +Cc: Tom Lane , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Message-ID: <20030311041133.GC79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030310224706.T35660@hub.org> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <20030310224706.T35660@hub.org> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/58 +X-Sequence-Number: 9301 + +> > Heh, kqueue is _the_ reason to use FreeBSD. +> > +> > http://www.kegel.com/dkftpbench/Poller_bench.html#results +> > +> > I've toyed with the idea of adding this because it is monstrously more +> > efficient than select()/poll() in basically every way, shape, and +> > form. +> +> I would personally be interested in seeing patches ... what would be +> involved? + +Whoa! Surprisingly, much less than I expected!!! A small shim would +have to be put in place to abstract away returning valid file +descriptors that are ready to be read()/write(). What's really cool, +is there are only a handful of places that'd have to be updated (as +far as I can tell): + +src/backend/access/transam/xact.c +src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c +src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c +src/backend/storage/lmgr/s_lock.c +src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c +src/interfaces/libpq/fe-misc.c + +Then it'd be possible to have clients/servers switch between kqueue, +poll, select, or whatever the new flavor of alerting from available IO +fd's. I've added it to my personal TODO list of things to work on. +If someone beats me to it, cool, it's just something that one day I'll +get to (hopefully). -sc + +-- +Sean Chittenden + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 23:17:48 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6091475C15 + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:17:43 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2B4Hmn10386 + for pgsql-committers@postgresql.org; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:17:48 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101]) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h2B4Hg710206; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:17:42 +0800 (WST) +Message-ID: <018201c2e785$2c12c750$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +To: "Sean Chittenden" , + "Marc G. Fournier" +Cc: "Tom Lane" , +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030310224706.T35660@hub.org> + <20030311041133.GC79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:17:46 +0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/59 +X-Sequence-Number: 9302 + +> > I would personally be interested in seeing patches ... what would be +> > involved? +> +> Whoa! Surprisingly, much less than I expected!!! A small shim would +> have to be put in place to abstract away returning valid file +> descriptors that are ready to be read()/write(). What's really cool, +> is there are only a handful of places that'd have to be updated (as +> far as I can tell): + +It would be nice to have this support there, however Tom was correct in +saying it really only applies to network apps that are handling thousands of +connections, all really, really fast. Postgres doesn't. I say you'd have +to do the work, then do the benchmarking to see if it makes a difference. + +Chris + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 23:42:34 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from bob.samurai.com (bob.samurai.com [205.207.28.75]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFFF447592C + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:42:31 -0500 (EST) +Received: from DU150.N224.ResNet.QueensU.CA (DU150.N224.ResNet.QueensU.CA + [130.15.224.150]) by bob.samurai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 5F0CD1EDE; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:42:36 -0500 (EST) +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +From: Neil Conway +To: Christopher Kings-Lynne +Cc: Sean Chittenden , + "Marc G. Fournier" , Tom Lane , + pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +In-Reply-To: <018201c2e785$2c12c750$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030310224706.T35660@hub.org> + <20030311041133.GC79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <018201c2e785$2c12c750$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +Content-Type: text/plain +Organization: +Message-Id: <1047357755.357.1.camel@tokyo> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 10 Mar 2003 23:42:35 -0500 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/60 +X-Sequence-Number: 9303 + +On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 23:17, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: +> It would be nice to have this support there, however Tom was correct in +> saying it really only applies to network apps that are handling thousands of +> connections, all really, really fast. Postgres doesn't. I say you'd have +> to do the work, then do the benchmarking to see if it makes a difference. + +... and if it doesn't make a significant difference, I'd oppose +including it in the mainline source. Performance optimization is one +thing; performance "optimization" that doesn't actually improve +performance is another :-) + +Cheers, + +Neil +-- +Neil Conway || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC + + + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 23:53:04 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF97A475C15 + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:53:00 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2B4r5411585 + for pgsql-committers@postgresql.org; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:53:05 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101]) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h2B4qu711358; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:52:56 +0800 (WST) +Message-ID: <01a001c2e78a$18bfa0b0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +To: "Neil Conway" +Cc: "Sean Chittenden" , + "Marc G. Fournier" , "Tom Lane" , + +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030310224706.T35660@hub.org> + <20030311041133.GC79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <018201c2e785$2c12c750$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <1047357755.357.1.camel@tokyo> +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:53:01 +0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/61 +X-Sequence-Number: 9304 + +> > It would be nice to have this support there, however Tom was correct in +> > saying it really only applies to network apps that are handling +thousands of +> > connections, all really, really fast. Postgres doesn't. I say you'd +have +> > to do the work, then do the benchmarking to see if it makes a +difference. +> +> ... and if it doesn't make a significant difference, I'd oppose +> including it in the mainline source. Performance optimization is one +> thing; performance "optimization" that doesn't actually improve +> performance is another :-) + +That was the unsaid implication... :) + +Chris + + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 10 23:56:33 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (internal.ext.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78C98475C15 + for ; + Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:56:32 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id DF2A62105B; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:56:10 -0800 (PST) +Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:56:10 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Neil Conway +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + "Marc G. Fournier" , Tom Lane , + pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Message-ID: <20030311045610.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030310224706.T35660@hub.org> + <20030311041133.GC79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <018201c2e785$2c12c750$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <1047357755.357.1.camel@tokyo> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <1047357755.357.1.camel@tokyo> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/62 +X-Sequence-Number: 9305 + +> > It would be nice to have this support there, however Tom was +> > correct in saying it really only applies to network apps that are +> > handling thousands of connections, all really, really fast. +> > Postgres doesn't. I say you'd have to do the work, then do the +> > benchmarking to see if it makes a difference. +> +> ... and if it doesn't make a significant difference, I'd oppose +> including it in the mainline source. Performance optimization is one +> thing; performance "optimization" that doesn't actually improve +> performance is another :-) + +::sigh:: Well, I'm not about to argue one way or another on this +beyond saying: kqueue is better than select/poll, but there are much +bigger, much lower, and much easier pieces of fruit to pick off the +optimization tree given the cost/benefit for the amount of network IO +PostgreSQL does. That said, what was the performance gain of moving +from select() to poll()? It wasn't the biggest optimization in +PostgreSQL history, nor the smallest, but it was a step forward. -sc + +-- +Sean Chittenden + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 11 02:32:41 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C22BE47617D + for ; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:06:19 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2B56Fub002774; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:06:15 -0500 (EST) +To: Sean Chittenden +Cc: Neil Conway , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + "Marc G. Fournier" , pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +In-reply-to: <20030311045610.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030306031656.1876F4762E0@postgresql.org> + <032f01c2e390$b1842b20$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030310224706.T35660@hub.org> + <20030311041133.GC79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <018201c2e785$2c12c750$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <1047357755.357.1.camel@tokyo> + <20030311045610.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +Comments: In-reply-to Sean Chittenden + message dated "Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:56:10 -0800" +Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:06:14 -0500 +Message-ID: <2773.1047359174@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/64 +X-Sequence-Number: 9307 + +Sean Chittenden writes: +> That said, what was the performance gain of moving +> from select() to poll()? It wasn't the biggest optimization in +> PostgreSQL history, nor the smallest, but it was a step forward. -sc + +That change was not sold as a performance improvement; I doubt that it +is one. It was sold as not failing when libpq runs inside an +application that has thousands of open files (i.e., more than select() +can cope with). "Faster" is debatable, "fails" is not... + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 11 00:30:56 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (internal.ext.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4082475E82 + for ; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:30:54 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id A7BA42105B; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 21:30:33 -0800 (PST) +Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 21:30:33 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Tom Lane +Cc: Neil Conway , + Christopher Kings-Lynne , + "Marc G. Fournier" , pgsql-committers@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... +Message-ID: <20030311053033.GH79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <11077.1046921667@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <033f01c2e392$71476570$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <12228.1046922471@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030306094117.GA79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030310224706.T35660@hub.org> + <20030311041133.GC79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <018201c2e785$2c12c750$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> + <1047357755.357.1.camel@tokyo> + <20030311045610.GF79234@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <2773.1047359174@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <2773.1047359174@sss.pgh.pa.us> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/63 +X-Sequence-Number: 9306 + +> > That said, what was the performance gain of moving from select() +> > to poll()? It wasn't the biggest optimization in PostgreSQL +> > history, nor the smallest, but it was a step forward. -sc +> +> That change was not sold as a performance improvement; I doubt that +> it is one. It was sold as not failing when libpq runs inside an +> application that has thousands of open files (i.e., more than +> select() can cope with). "Faster" is debatable, "fails" is not... + +Well, I've only heard through 2nd hand sources (dillion) the kind of +hellish conditions that Mark has on his boxen, but "faster and more +efficient in the kernel" is "faster and more efficient in the kernel" +no matter how 'ya slice it and I know that every last bit helps a +loaded system. + +I'm not stating that most people, or even 90% of people, will notice. +Hopefully 100% of the universe runs their boxen under ideal conditions +(like most databases should, right? ::wink wink, nudge nudge:: For +those that don't, however, and get to watch things run in the red with +a load average over 20, the use of kqueue or more efficient system +calls is likely very appreciated. -sc + +-- +Sean Chittenden + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 11 03:46:38 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from nic-nts1.nic.parallel.ltd.uk (parallel1.demon.co.uk + [194.222.145.131]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E851A475D0F + for ; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 03:46:34 -0500 (EST) +Received: by nic-nts1.nic.parallel.ltd.uk with Internet Mail Service + (5.5.2656.59) id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 08:46:33 -0000 +Message-ID: + +From: Nikk Anderson +To: 'Scott Buchan' , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Large difference between elapsed time and run time +Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 08:46:32 -0000 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2E7AA.B7121F70" +X-Archive-Number: 200303/75 +X-Sequence-Number: 1373 + +This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand +this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E7AA.B7121F70 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" + +Hi, + +I have noted similar issues in the past - and seemed then that most of the overhead bottleneck was due to establishing a new connection in the front end. As soon as I started using connection pooling, with connections made when the app initialises, and then recycled for each request (i.e. the connections never close) then the execution time was far quicker. +I have also noticed that sparc processor speed, num processors, disk space and memory seems to makes little difference with postgres (for us anyway!) performance - e.g. performance no better with dual sparc 450mhz, 2 scsi disks, 1Gb mem - than on a single processor 400 mhz Netra, 256Mb ram with a single IDE disk! + +Nikk + +-----Original Message----- +From: Scott Buchan [mailto:sbuchan@technicacorp.com] +Sent: 10 March 2003 18:58 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time for queries + + +Hello, + +While running benchmarks for my database, I am seeing a large difference in the elapsed time (from stats collected in the logs) and run time (running explain analyze on the query using ./psql ) for each of my queries. The database is being ran on a sunfire 880 with 4 750mhz processors with 8 G RAM running solaris 8 + +I am simulating 200 user connections each running 6 select queries on 1 indexed table with 50,000 records. The elapsed time for the queries average around 2.5 seconds while if I run the query using explain analyze while the test is running, the run time is around 300 ms although it takes much longer (few seconds) to display the results. If I reduce the number of concurrent connections to 100 then the run time and elapsed time for the queries are the same. + +I have tried numerous configurations in the postgresql.conf file. I have set the shared_buffers with values ranging from 75 MB to 4000MB with no luck. I have also tried increasing the sort_mem with no luck. + + +When the test is running, the cpu is well over 50% idle and iostat shows that the processes are not waiting for i/o and disk usage percentage is low. + +Any help would be appreciated. + +Thanks. + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E7AA.B7121F70 +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + + + + + + +RE: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time for= + queries + + + +

Hi, +

+ +

I have noted similar issues in the past - and seemed then= + that most of the overhead bottleneck was due to establishing a new connect= +ion in the front end.  As soon as I started using connection pooling, = +with connections made when the app initialises, and then recycled for each = +request (i.e. the connections never close) then the execution time was far = +quicker.

+ +

I have also noticed that sparc processor speed, num proce= +ssors, disk space and memory seems to makes little difference with postgres= + (for us anyway!) performance - e.g. performance no better with dual sparc = +450mhz, 2 scsi disks, 1Gb mem - than on a single processor 400 mhz Netra, 2= +56Mb ram with a single IDE disk!

+ +

Nikk +

+ + +
+ +

Hello, +

+ +

While running benchmarks for my database, I am seeing a l= +arge difference in the elapsed time (from stats collected in the logs) and = +run time (running explain analyze on the query using ./psql <database>= +;) for each of my queries.  The database is being ran on a sunfire 880= + with 4 750mhz processors with 8 G RAM running solaris 8

+ +

I am simulating 200 user connections each running 6 selec= +t queries on 1 indexed table with 50,000 records. The elapsed time for the = +queries average around 2.5 seconds while if I run the query using explain a= +nalyze while the test is running, the run time is around 300 ms although it= + takes much longer (few seconds) to display the results.  If I reduce = +the number of concurrent connections to 100 then the run time and elapsed t= +ime for the queries are the same.

+ +

I have tried numerous configurations in the postgresql.co= +nf file.  I have set the shared_buffers with values ranging from 75 MB= + to 4000MB with no luck.  I have also tried increasing the sort_mem wi= +th no luck.

+
+ +

When the test is running, the cpu is well over 50% idle a= +nd iostat shows that the processes are not waiting for i/o and disk usage p= +ercentage is low.

+ +

Any help would be appreciated. +

+ +

Thanks. +

+ + + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E7AA.B7121F70-- + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 11 09:17:12 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost.localdomain (208-41-234-242.client.dsl.net + [208.41.234.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86917475CE5 + for ; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:17:07 -0500 (EST) +Received: from endeavour (endeavour.pointhere.net [192.168.2.11]) + by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h2BE7co29797; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:07:38 -0500 +Message-ID: <00fb01c2e7d9$e804bfa0$0b02a8c0@pointhere.net> +Reply-To: "Jeffrey D. Brower" +From: "Jeffrey D. Brower" +To: "Nikk Anderson" , + "'Scott Buchan'" , + +References: + +Subject: Re: Large difference between elapsed time and run time +Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:24:20 -0500 +Organization: A Basic Marketing Company +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00F8_01C2E7AF.FF0B9F40" +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/76 +X-Sequence-Number: 1374 + +This is a multi-part message in MIME format. + +------=_NextPart_000_00F8_01C2E7AF.FF0B9F40 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +RE: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time for querie= +sExcuse me for butting into this conversation but I would LOVE to know exac= +tly how you manage that pooling because I have this same issue. When I run= + a test selection using psql I get sub-second response time and when I use = +the online (a separate machine dedicated to http) and do a pg_connect to th= +e database using PHP4 I hit 45-50 second response times. I even tried chan= +ging the connection to a persistent connection with pg_pconnect and I get t= +he same thing. I installed the database on the http machine and the respon= +ses are much quicker, but still not quite ideal. + +My question is how are you accomplishing the connection pooling? + + Jeff=20 + ----- Original Message -----=20 + From: Nikk Anderson=20 + To: 'Scott Buchan' ; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org=20 + Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 3:46 AM + Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time= +=20 + + + Hi,=20 + + I have noted similar issues in the past - and seemed then that most of th= +e overhead bottleneck was due to establishing a new connection in the front= + end. As soon as I started using connection pooling, with connections made= + when the app initialises, and then recycled for each request (i.e. the con= +nections never close) then the execution time was far quicker.=20 + + I have also noticed that sparc processor speed, num processors, disk spac= +e and memory seems to makes little difference with postgres (for us anyway!= +) performance - e.g. performance no better with dual sparc 450mhz, 2 scsi d= +isks, 1Gb mem - than on a single processor 400 mhz Netra, 256Mb ram with a = +single IDE disk! + + Nikk=20 + + -----Original Message-----=20 + From: Scott Buchan [mailto:sbuchan@technicacorp.com]=20 + Sent: 10 March 2003 18:58=20 + To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org=20 + Subject: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time for= + queries=20 + + + + Hello,=20 + + While running benchmarks for my database, I am seeing a large difference = +in the elapsed time (from stats collected in the logs) and run time (runnin= +g explain analyze on the query using ./psql ) for each of my quer= +ies. The database is being ran on a sunfire 880 with 4 750mhz processors w= +ith 8 G RAM running solaris 8 + + I am simulating 200 user connections each running 6 select queries on 1 i= +ndexed table with 50,000 records. The elapsed time for the queries average = +around 2.5 seconds while if I run the query using explain analyze while the= + test is running, the run time is around 300 ms although it takes much long= +er (few seconds) to display the results. If I reduce the number of concurr= +ent connections to 100 then the run time and elapsed time for the queries a= +re the same. + + I have tried numerous configurations in the postgresql.conf file. I have= + set the shared_buffers with values ranging from 75 MB to 4000MB with no lu= +ck. I have also tried increasing the sort_mem with no luck. + + + + When the test is running, the cpu is well over 50% idle and iostat shows = +that the processes are not waiting for i/o and disk usage percentage is low. + + Any help would be appreciated.=20 + + Thanks.=20 + + +------=_NextPart_000_00F8_01C2E7AF.FF0B9F40 +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + + +RE: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and = +run time for queries + + + + + +
Excuse me for butting into this conversation but= + I=20 +would LOVE to know exactly how you manage that pooling because I have this = +same=20 +issue.  When I run a test selection using psql I get sub-second respon= +se=20 +time and when I use the online (a separate machine dedicated to http) = +and=20 +do a pg_connect to the database using PHP4 I hit 45-50 second response=20 +times.  I even tried changing the connection to a persistent connectio= +n=20 +with pg_pconnect and I get the same thing.  I installed the datab= +ase=20 +on the http machine and the responses are much quicker, but still not quite= +=20 +ideal.
+
 
+
My question is how are you accomplishing the con= +nection=20 +pooling?
+
 
+
     Jeff
+
+
----- Original Message -----
+ Fro= +m:=20 + Nikk Anderson +
To: 'Scott Buchan' ; pgsql-performance@postgr= +esql.org=20 +
+
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 3:46= +=20 + AM
+
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Large diffe= +rence=20 + between elapsed time and run time
+

+

Hi,

+

I have noted similar issues in the past - and seemed th= +en that=20 + most of the overhead bottleneck was due to establishing a new connection = +in=20 + the front end.  As soon as I started using connection pooling, with= +=20 + connections made when the app initialises, and then recycled for each req= +uest=20 + (i.e. the connections never close) then the execution time was far quicke= +r.=20 +

+

I have also noticed that sparc processor speed, num=20 + processors, disk space and memory seems to makes little difference with= +=20 + postgres (for us anyway!) performance - e.g. performance no better with d= +ual=20 + sparc 450mhz, 2 scsi disks, 1Gb mem - than on a single processor 400 mhz= +=20 + Netra, 256Mb ram with a single IDE disk!

+

Nikk

+

-----Original Message-----
Fr= +om: Scott=20 + Buchan [mailto:sbuchan@technicacorp.com<= +/A>]=20 +
Sent: 10 March 2003 18:58
To= +:=20 + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: [PERF= +ORM]=20 + Large difference between elapsed time and run time for queries
+

Hello,

+

While running benchmarks for my database, I am seeing a= + large=20 + difference in the elapsed time (from stats collected in the logs) and run= + time=20 + (running explain analyze on the query using ./psql <database>) for = +each=20 + of my queries.  The database is being ran on a sunfire 880 with 4 75= +0mhz=20 + processors with 8 G RAM running solaris 8

+

I am simulating 200 user connections each running 6 sel= +ect=20 + queries on 1 indexed table with 50,000 records. The elapsed time for the= +=20 + queries average around 2.5 seconds while if I run the query using explain= +=20 + analyze while the test is running, the run time is around 300 ms although= + it=20 + takes much longer (few seconds) to display the results.  If I reduce= + the=20 + number of concurrent connections to 100 then the run time and elapsed tim= +e for=20 + the queries are the same.

+

I have tried numerous configurations in the postgresql.= +conf=20 + file.  I have set the shared_buffers with values ranging from 75 MB = +to=20 + 4000MB with no luck.  I have also tried increasing the sort_mem with= + no=20 + luck.


+

When the test is running, the cpu is well over 50% idle= + and=20 + iostat shows that the processes are not waiting for i/o and disk usage=20 + percentage is low.

+

Any help would be appreciated.

+

Thanks.

+ +------=_NextPart_000_00F8_01C2E7AF.FF0B9F40-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 11 09:30:49 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from nic-nts1.nic.parallel.ltd.uk (parallel1.demon.co.uk + [194.222.145.131]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DFCF475F3D + for ; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:30:42 -0500 (EST) +Received: by nic-nts1.nic.parallel.ltd.uk with Internet Mail Service + (5.5.2656.59) id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 14:30:45 -0000 +Message-ID: + +From: Nikk Anderson +To: "'Jeffrey D. Brower'" , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Large difference between elapsed time and run time +Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 14:30:45 -0000 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2E7DA.CD6C7880" +X-Archive-Number: 200303/77 +X-Sequence-Number: 1375 + +This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand +this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E7DA.CD6C7880 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" + +Hi, + +-----Original Message----- +From: Jeffrey D. Brower [mailto:jeff@pointhere.net] +Sent: 11 March 2003 14:24 +To: Nikk Anderson; 'Scott Buchan'; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time + +>My question is how are you accomplishing the connection pooling? + + +I have programmed a connection pool in Java - I am sure something similar is possible in most other languages. + +Very basically, the concept is as follows: + +> Application initialisation + >>> 1) Create X number of connections to the database + >>> 2) Store connections in an Object + >>> 3) Create an array of free and busy connections - put all new connections in free connection array + >>> 4) Object is visible to all components of web application + +> Request for a connection + >>> 4) Code asks for a connection from the pool object (3). + >>> 5) Pool object moves connection from free array, to the busy array. + >>> 5) Connection is used to do queries + >>> 6) Connection is sent back to pool object (3). + >>> 7) Pool object moves the connection from the busy array, back to the free array + + +I hope that helps! + +Nikk + +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E7DA.CD6C7880 +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + + + + + + +RE: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time </T= +ITLE> +</HEAD> +<BODY> + +<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hi, </FONT> +</P> + +<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT> +<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Jeffrey D. Brower [<A HREF=3D"mailto:jeff@pointher= +e.net">mailto:jeff@pointhere.net</A>]</FONT> +<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: 11 March 2003 14:24</FONT> +<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: Nikk Anderson; 'Scott Buchan'; pgsql-performance@pos= +tgresql.org</FONT> +<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed = +time and run time </FONT> +</P> + +<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>>My question is how are you accomplishing the connecti= +on pooling?</FONT> +</P> +<BR> + +<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I have programmed a connection pool in Java - I am sure s= +omething similar is possible in most other languages. </FONT> +</P> + +<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Very basically, the concept is as follows:</FONT> +</P> + +<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Application initialisation</FONT> +<BR>        <FONT SIZE=3D2>>>> = +1) Create X number of connections to the database</FONT> +<BR>        <FONT SIZE=3D2>>>> = +2) Store connections in an Object</FONT> +<BR>        <FONT SIZE=3D2>>>> = +3) Create an array of free and busy connections - put all new connections i= +n free connection array</FONT> +<BR>        <FONT SIZE=3D2>>>> = +4) Object is visible to all components of web application</FONT> +</P> + +<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Request for a connection</FONT> +<BR>        <FONT SIZE=3D2>>>> = +4) Code asks for a connection from the pool object (3).  </FONT> +<BR>        <FONT SIZE=3D2>>>> = +5) Pool object moves connection from free array, to the busy array.</FONT> +<BR>        <FONT SIZE=3D2>>>> = +5) Connection is used to do queries</FONT> +<BR>        <FONT SIZE=3D2>>>> = +6) Connection is sent back to pool object (3).  </FONT> +<BR>        <FONT SIZE=3D2>>>> = +7) Pool object moves the connection from the busy array, back to the free a= +rray</FONT> +</P> +<BR> + +<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I hope that helps!</FONT> +</P> + +<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Nikk</FONT> +</P> + +</BODY> +</HTML> +------_=_NextPart_001_01C2E7DA.CD6C7880-- + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 11 09:47:37 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost.localdomain (208-41-234-242.client.dsl.net + [208.41.234.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8EC847601F + for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:47:31 -0500 (EST) +Received: from endeavour (endeavour.pointhere.net [192.168.2.11]) + by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h2BEb3o30298; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:37:04 -0500 +Message-ID: <011d01c2e7de$0451c960$0b02a8c0@pointhere.net> +Reply-To: "Jeffrey D. Brower" <jeff@pointhere.net> +From: "Jeffrey D. Brower" <jeff@pointhere.net> +To: "Nikk Anderson" <Nikk.Anderson@parallel.ltd.uk>, + <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org> +References: + <DA1274E682D3734B8802904A9B36124C298CD8@nic-nts1.nic.parallel.ltd.uk> +Subject: Re: Large difference between elapsed time and run time +Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:53:45 -0500 +Organization: A Basic Marketing Company +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----=_NextPart_000_011A_01C2E7B4.1B64DE00" +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/78 +X-Sequence-Number: 1376 + +This is a multi-part message in MIME format. + +------=_NextPart_000_011A_01C2E7B4.1B64DE00 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +RE: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run timeYes, this h= +elps a lot. Obviously this is far more complicated than just a simple pg_p= +connect to accomplish a speedy reply. I really thought that a persistent c= +onnection was supposed to eliminate the overhead time in a connection (well= +, other than the first time through). But even if I am the only person on = +the machine it still takes forever to get a response every time I use http.= + I wondered if I was supposed to have a php program that had its own pconn= +ect and every http call to the PostgreSQL database went to that php program= + rather than handling it by itself, but I found no indication of that while= + RTFM. I will give this a try and see if I can get the speed to anything r= +easonable. Thanks for the quick reply! + + Jeff + ----- Original Message -----=20 + From: Nikk Anderson=20 + To: 'Jeffrey D. Brower' ; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org=20 + Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:30 AM + Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time= +=20 + + + Hi,=20 + + -----Original Message-----=20 + From: Jeffrey D. Brower [mailto:jeff@pointhere.net]=20 + Sent: 11 March 2003 14:24=20 + To: Nikk Anderson; 'Scott Buchan'; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org=20 + Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time= +=20 + + >My question is how are you accomplishing the connection pooling?=20 + + + + I have programmed a connection pool in Java - I am sure something similar= + is possible in most other languages.=20 + + Very basically, the concept is as follows:=20 + + > Application initialisation=20 + >>> 1) Create X number of connections to the database=20 + >>> 2) Store connections in an Object=20 + >>> 3) Create an array of free and busy connections - put all new= + connections in free connection array=20 + >>> 4) Object is visible to all components of web application=20 + + > Request for a connection=20 + >>> 4) Code asks for a connection from the pool object (3).=20=20 + >>> 5) Pool object moves connection from free array, to the busy = +array.=20 + >>> 5) Connection is used to do queries=20 + >>> 6) Connection is sent back to pool object (3).=20=20 + >>> 7) Pool object moves the connection from the busy array, back= + to the free array=20 + + + + I hope that helps!=20 + + Nikk=20 + + +------=_NextPart_000_011A_01C2E7B4.1B64DE00 +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> +<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>RE: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and = +run time + + + + + +
Yes, this helps a lot.  Obviously this is f= +ar more=20 +complicated than just a simple pg_pconnect to accomplish a speedy reply.&nb= +sp; I=20 +really thought that a persistent connection was supposed to eliminate the= +=20 +overhead time in a connection (well, other than the first time through).&nb= +sp;=20 +But even if I am the only person on the machine it still takes forever to g= +et a=20 +response every time I use http.  I wondered if I was supposed to have = +a php=20 +program that had its own pconnect and every http call to the PostgreSQL=20 +database went to that php program rather than handling it by itself, b= +ut I=20 +found no indication of that while RTFM.  I will give this a try and se= +e if=20 +I can get the speed to anything reasonable.  Thanks for the quick=20 +reply!
+
 
+
     Jeff
+

-----Original Message----- +
From: Scott Buchan [mailto:sbuchan@technicacorp.com] +
Sent: 10 March 2003 18:58 +
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +
Subject: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time= + and run time for queries +

+
----- Original Message -----
+ Fro= +m:=20 + Nikk Anderson +
To: 'Jeffrey D. Brower' ; pgsql-performance@postgr= +esql.org=20 +
+
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:30= +=20 + AM
+
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Large diffe= +rence=20 + between elapsed time and run time
+

+

Hi,

+

-----Original Message-----
Fr= +om:=20 + Jeffrey D. Brower [mailto:jeff@pointhere.net]= +=20 +
Sent: 11 March 2003 14:24
To= +: Nikk=20 + Anderson; 'Scott Buchan'; pgsql-performance@postgr= +esql.org=20 +
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapse= +d time=20 + and run time

+

>My question is how are you accomplishing the connec= +tion=20 + pooling?


+

I have programmed a connection pool in Java - I am sure= +=20 + something similar is possible in most other languages.

+

Very basically, the concept is as follows:

+

> Application initialisation=20 +
        >>>= +; 1)=20 + Create X number of connections to the database=20 +
        >>>= +; 2)=20 + Store connections in an Object=20 +
        >>>= +; 3)=20 + Create an array of free and busy connections - put all new connections in= + free=20 + connection array
        >>> 4) Object is visible to all components of web=20 + application

+

> Request for a connection=20 +
        >>>= +; 4)=20 + Code asks for a connection from the pool object (3). =20 +
        >>> 5) Pool object moves connection from free array, to= + the=20 + busy array.
        >>> 5) Connection is used to do queries=20 +
        >>>= +; 6)=20 + Connection is sent back to pool object (3). =20 +
        >>> 7) Pool object moves the connection from the busy a= +rray,=20 + back to the free array


+

I hope that helps!

+

Nikk

+ +------=_NextPart_000_011A_01C2E7B4.1B64DE00-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 11 15:23:52 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mailrelay (technicacorp.com [216.181.29.134]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4D2476178 + for ; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:20:05 -0500 (EST) +thread-index: AcLn+sGq2G9w81juTlSzJozTp1pQ7Q== +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Received: from WWWSERVER.technicacorp.com ([216.181.29.149]) by mailrelay with + Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:19:28 -0500 +Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message +Importance: normal +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +Received: by wwwserver with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) id ; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:23:31 -0500 +Message-ID: <71F044551C53974EB0735B3737EFE2FC08862B@wwwserver> +From: "Scott Buchan" +To: +Subject: Re: Large difference between elapsed time and run time for queries +Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:23:21 -0500 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Mar 2003 18:19:28.0911 (UTC) + FILETIME=[C134F9F0:01C2E7FA] +X-Archive-Number: 200303/79 +X-Sequence-Number: 1377 + +Thanks for the quick reply. + +I just upgraded from 7.2 to 7.3 since 7.3 uses a different qsort +(BSD-licensed). After running a few tests, I have noticed some performance +gains. + +I think another problem that I was having was due to the way I was +performing the tests. I was using the tool "The Grinder" to simulate 300 +connections (through JDBC) to the database each running 6 queries without +any connection pooling. Once I figure out how to use connection pooling +with the Grinder, I will try running the tests again. + +Do you know of any other performance issues with using Solaris? + +Thanks for the help, + +Scott + + +-----Original Message----- +From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us] +Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 3:08 PM +To: Scott Buchan +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time +for queries + +"Scott Buchan" writes: +> I am simulating 200 user connections each running 6 select queries on 1 +> indexed table with 50,000 records. The elapsed time for the queries +average +> around 2.5 seconds while if I run the query using explain analyze while +the +> test is running, the run time is around 300 ms although it takes much +longer +> (few seconds) to display the results. + +How many rows are these queries returning? AFAICS the differential must +be the cost of transmitting the data to the frontend, which of course +does not happen when you use explain analyze. (I think, but am not +completely sure, that explain analyze also suppresses the CPU effort of +converting the data to text form, as would normally be done before +transmitting it. But given that you don't see a problem at 100 +connections, that's probably not where the issue lies.) + +> The database is being ran on a sunfire 880 with 4 750mhz +> processors with 8 G RAM running solaris 8 + +We have seen some other weird performance problems on Solaris (their +standard qsort apparently is very bad, for example). Might be that you +need to be looking at kernel behavior, not at Postgres. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 11 15:52:19 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mail1.ihs.com (mail1.ihs.com [170.207.70.222]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B055476304 + for ; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 15:52:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: from css120.ihs.com (css120.ihs.com [170.207.105.120]) + by mail1.ihs.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2BKoB8T014204; + Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:50:12 -0700 (MST) +Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:50:30 -0700 (MST) +From: "scott.marlowe" +To: "Jeffrey D. Brower" +Cc: Nikk Anderson , + "'Scott Buchan'" , + +Subject: Re: Large difference between elapsed time and run time +In-Reply-To: <00fb01c2e7d9$e804bfa0$0b02a8c0@pointhere.net> +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-MailScanner: Found to be clean +X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: +X-Archive-Number: 200303/80 +X-Sequence-Number: 1378 + +On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Jeffrey D. Brower wrote: + +> RE: [PERFORM] Large difference between elapsed time and run time for +> queriesExcuse me for butting into this conversation but I would LOVE to +> know exactly how you manage that pooling because I have this same issue. +> When I run a test selection using psql I get sub-second response time +> and when I use the online (a separate machine dedicated to http) and do +> a pg_connect to the database using PHP4 I hit 45-50 second response +> times. I even tried changing the connection to a persistent connection +> with pg_pconnect and I get the same thing. I installed the database on +> the http machine and the responses are much quicker, but still not quite +> ideal. +> +> My question is how are you accomplishing the connection pooling? + +In PHP, you do NOT have the elegant connection pooling that jdbc and +AOLServer have. It's easy to build an apache/php/postgresql server that +collapses under load if you don't know how to configure it to make sure +apache runs out of children before postgresql runs out of resources. + +You have a connection for each apache child, and they are +per database and per users, so if you connect as frank to db1, then the +next page connects as jenny to db2, it can't reuse that connection. The +setting in php.ini that says max persistant connects is PER PROCESS, not +total, so if you have that set to 5, and max apache children to 150, you +could theoretically wind up with 749 idle connections after a while. Not +good. + +If your machine is taking more than a few milliseconds to connect to +postgresql, something is very wrong with it. It could be you're running +out of memory and having a swap storm, or that postgresql front ends are +crashing, or any other problem. What does top or free show when you are +connecting? i.e. how much memory is used by swap, how much is cache, how +much is shared, all that jazz. + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 15:49:05 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from hm61.locaweb.com.br (hm61.locaweb.com.br [200.213.197.161]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AE9874758E6 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:49:02 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 17969 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2003 20:51:27 -0000 +Received: from hm20.locaweb.com.br (200.246.179.120) + by hm61.locaweb.com.br with QMTP; 12 Mar 2003 20:51:27 -0000 +Received: (qmail 11721 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2003 20:50:56 -0000 +Received: from unknown (HELO fabio) (contato@enix.com.br@200.207.117.104) + by hm20.locaweb.com.br with SMTP; 12 Mar 2003 20:50:56 -0000 +Message-ID: <000701c2e8d8$95637b60$02ada8c0@enix> +From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Enix_Empreendimentos_e_Constru=E7=F5es_Ltda.?= + +To: +Subject: Postgresql performance +Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:47:23 -0300 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/81 +X-Sequence-Number: 1379 + +Hi everybody. + +I am a newbie to Postgresql, trying to migrate an application from MSAccess. + +I am quite dissapointed with the problems I am facing with some queries +containing multiple joins. I confess it has been hard for someone that is +not a DBA to figure out which are the problems. Just to ilustrate, I have +some queries that provide a reasonable query plan (at least from my point of +view), but that return no result: keep running on and on. + +My system description is: Postgresql 7.1.3, Linux RedHat 7.1 (all patches +applied), 160Mb RAM. + +Is the performance of the mentioned Postgresql version much slower than the +7.3.1? + +All advice will be more than appeciated. + +Regards. + +Fabio + + +--- +Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. +Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). +Version: 6.0.461 / Virus Database: 260 - Release Date: 10/03/2003 + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 16:39:46 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from utahisp.com (mail.cyber-wire.com [66.239.12.3]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B79B4769F8 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:38:15 -0500 (EST) +Received: from chad [63.230.8.76] by utahisp.com + (SMTPD32-7.14) id A84DBC59027E; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:36:13 -0700 +Message-ID: <0c8a01c2e8df$b205a2a0$32021aac@chad> +From: "Chad Thompson" +To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Enix_Empreendimentos_e_Constru=E7=F5es_Ltda.?= + , +References: <000701c2e8d8$95637b60$02ada8c0@enix> +Subject: Re: Postgresql performance +Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:38:16 -0700 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 +X-Declude-Sender: chad@weblinkservices.com [63.230.8.76] +X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for + spam. +X-Archive-Number: 200303/82 +X-Sequence-Number: 1380 + +There are a lot of things that can be done to speed up your queries. +Especially if you are using the kludge that Access puts out. Post some of +them and we can help. + +As far as the difference between 7.1.3 and 7.3.2 there are a lot of +optimizations as well as bug fixes, its always a good idea to upgrade. + +HTH +Chad +----- Original Message ----- +From: "Enix Empreendimentos e Constru��es Ltda." +To: +Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 1:47 PM +Subject: [PERFORM] Postgresql performance + + +> Hi everybody. +> +> I am a newbie to Postgresql, trying to migrate an application from +MSAccess. +> +> I am quite dissapointed with the problems I am facing with some queries +> containing multiple joins. I confess it has been hard for someone that is +> not a DBA to figure out which are the problems. Just to ilustrate, I have +> some queries that provide a reasonable query plan (at least from my point +of +> view), but that return no result: keep running on and on. +> +> My system description is: Postgresql 7.1.3, Linux RedHat 7.1 (all patches +> applied), 160Mb RAM. +> +> Is the performance of the mentioned Postgresql version much slower than +the +> 7.3.1? +> +> All advice will be more than appeciated. +> +> Regards. +> +> Fabio +> +> +> --- +> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. +> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). +> Version: 6.0.461 / Virus Database: 260 - Release Date: 10/03/2003 +> +> +> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? +> +> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html +> + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 16:49:00 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from jester.inquent.com (unknown [216.208.117.7]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A1EF476543 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:46:08 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by jester.inquent.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h2CLjqTw057551; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:45:53 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rbt@rbt.ca) +Subject: Re: Postgresql performance +From: Rod Taylor +To: Enix Empreendimentos e =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Constru=E7=F5es?= "Ltda." + +Cc: Postgresql Performance +In-Reply-To: <000701c2e8d8$95637b60$02ada8c0@enix> +References: <000701c2e8d8$95637b60$02ada8c0@enix> +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; + boundary="=-29YHuXkyj8AJWUHrVYwm" +Organization: +Message-Id: <1047505552.55840.56.camel@jester> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 12 Mar 2003 16:45:52 -0500 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/83 +X-Sequence-Number: 1381 + +--=-29YHuXkyj8AJWUHrVYwm +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +> Is the performance of the mentioned Postgresql version much slower than t= +he +> 7.3.1? + +Somewhat, but not significantly. + +Standard questions: + +Have you run VACUUM? +Have you run ANALYZE? +What does EXPLAIN ANALYZE output for the slow queries? + +If performance is still poor after the first 2, send the results of +EXPLAIN here and we'll tell you which index you're missing ;) + +--=20 +Rod Taylor + +PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc + +--=-29YHuXkyj8AJWUHrVYwm +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc +Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) + +iD8DBQA+b6qP6DETLow6vwwRAr7CAJsGf2qKawsn3DQF0XcLsFR7YTgQ3ACeKk4D +gb3qpzwd1I2PEJc0pUObMD4= +=/DeV +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--=-29YHuXkyj8AJWUHrVYwm-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 17:38:14 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from cat (adsl-66-123-169-52.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [66.123.169.52]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0526476345 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:38:10 -0500 (EST) +Received: by cat (Postfix, from userid 501) + id 4EF7FB6D69; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:38:11 -0800 (PST) +Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:38:11 -0800 +From: Max Baker +To: PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +Subject: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +Message-ID: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/84 +X-Sequence-Number: 1382 + +I'm looking for a general method to +speed up DISTINCT and COUNT queries. + + +mydatabase=> EXPLAIN ANALYZE select distinct(mac) from node; +NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: + +Unique (cost=110425.67..110514.57 rows=3556 width=6) (actual +time=45289.78..45598.62 rows=25334 loops=1) + -> Sort (cost=110425.67..110425.67 rows=35561 width=6) (actual + time=45289.77..45411.53 rows=34597 loops=1) + -> Seq Scan on node (cost=0.00..107737.61 rows=35561 + width=6) (actual time=6.73..44383.57 rows=34597 loops=1) + + Total runtime: 45673.19 msec + ouch. + +I run VACCUUM ANALYZE once a day. + +Thanks, +max + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 17:52:22 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from jester.inquent.com + (CPE00508b028d7d-CM00803785c5e0.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com + [24.103.51.175]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B24D047634E + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:52:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by jester.inquent.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h2CMqJ9n057811; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:52:20 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rbt@rbt.ca) +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +From: Rod Taylor +To: Max Baker +Cc: PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +In-Reply-To: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; + boundary="=-sjRzIqqzFPTrNPe6cg49" +Organization: +Message-Id: <1047509538.57729.4.camel@jester> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 12 Mar 2003 17:52:19 -0500 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/85 +X-Sequence-Number: 1383 + +--=-sjRzIqqzFPTrNPe6cg49 +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 17:38, Max Baker wrote: +> I'm looking for a general method to=20 +> speed up DISTINCT and COUNT queries.=20 +>=20 +>=20 +> mydatabase=3D> EXPLAIN ANALYZE select distinct(mac) from node; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +>=20 +> Unique (cost=3D110425.67..110514.57 rows=3D3556 width=3D6) (actual +> time=3D45289.78..45598.62 rows=3D25334 loops=3D1) +> -> Sort (cost=3D110425.67..110425.67 rows=3D35561 width=3D6) (actual +> time=3D45289.77..45411.53 rows=3D34597 loops=3D1) +> -> Seq Scan on node (cost=3D0.00..107737.61 rows=3D35561 +> width=3D6) (actual time=3D6.73..44383.57 rows=3D34597 loops=3D1) +>=20 +> Total runtime: 45673.19 msec +> ouch.=20 +>=20 +> I run VACCUUM ANALYZE once a day.=20=20 + +Thats not going to do anything for that query, as there only is one +possible plan at the moment :) + +I don't think you can do much about that query, other than buy a faster +harddisk or more ram. Nearly all the time seems to be used pulling the +data off the disk (in the Seq Scan). + +--=20 +Rod Taylor + +PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc + +--=-sjRzIqqzFPTrNPe6cg49 +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc +Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) + +iD8DBQA+b7oi6DETLow6vwwRAsYHAJ9/PCLkwUwutS0ubA2l5dP/UzJmfACggv7P +hIWtgjnKP1BDYSw2S4h/bCc= +=bBdq +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--=-sjRzIqqzFPTrNPe6cg49-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 17:55:07 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from utahisp.com (utahisp.com [66.239.12.3]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3123476347 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:55:05 -0500 (EST) +Received: from chad [63.230.8.76] by utahisp.com + (SMTPD32-7.14) id AA513C0284; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:53:05 -0700 +Message-ID: <0ca601c2e8ea$6f7783d0$32021aac@chad> +From: "Chad Thompson" +To: "Max Baker" , "PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List" + +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:55:09 -0700 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 +X-Declude-Sender: chad@weblinkservices.com [63.230.8.76] +X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for + spam. +X-Archive-Number: 200303/86 +X-Sequence-Number: 1384 + +Ive found that group by works faster than distinct. + +Try +EXPLAIN ANALYZE select mac from node group by mac; + +HTH +Chad + +----- Original Message ----- +From: "Max Baker" +To: "PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List" +Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 3:38 PM +Subject: [PERFORM] speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries + + +> I'm looking for a general method to +> speed up DISTINCT and COUNT queries. +> +> +> mydatabase=> EXPLAIN ANALYZE select distinct(mac) from node; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Unique (cost=110425.67..110514.57 rows=3556 width=6) (actual +> time=45289.78..45598.62 rows=25334 loops=1) +> -> Sort (cost=110425.67..110425.67 rows=35561 width=6) (actual +> time=45289.77..45411.53 rows=34597 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on node (cost=0.00..107737.61 rows=35561 +> width=6) (actual time=6.73..44383.57 rows=34597 loops=1) +> +> Total runtime: 45673.19 msec +> ouch. +> +> I run VACCUUM ANALYZE once a day. +> +> Thanks, +> max +> +> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate +> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your +> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly +> + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 18:39:33 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from beamish.nsd.ca (beamish.nsd.ca [205.150.156.194]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7247E4758E6 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:39:31 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from smap@localhost) by beamish.nsd.ca (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA07170; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:39:28 -0500 +X-Authentication-Warning: beamish.nsd.ca: smap set sender to + using -f +Received: from reddog.nsd.ca(192.168.101.30) by beamish.nsd.ca via smap + (V2.1/2.1+anti-relay+anti-spam) + id xma007168; Wed, 12 Mar 03 18:39:17 -0500 +Received: from nsd.ca (jllachan-linux.nsd.ca [192.168.101.148]) + by reddog.nsd.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23885; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:35:05 -0500 +Message-ID: <3E6FC574.F15D9930@nsd.ca> +Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:40:36 -0500 +From: Jean-Luc Lachance +X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18-24.7.x i686) +X-Accept-Language: en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Max Baker +Cc: PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/87 +X-Sequence-Number: 1385 + +Do you have an index on mac? + + +Max Baker wrote: +> +> I'm looking for a general method to +> speed up DISTINCT and COUNT queries. +> +> mydatabase=> EXPLAIN ANALYZE select distinct(mac) from node; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Unique (cost=110425.67..110514.57 rows=3556 width=6) (actual +> time=45289.78..45598.62 rows=25334 loops=1) +> -> Sort (cost=110425.67..110425.67 rows=35561 width=6) (actual +> time=45289.77..45411.53 rows=34597 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on node (cost=0.00..107737.61 rows=35561 +> width=6) (actual time=6.73..44383.57 rows=34597 loops=1) +> +> Total runtime: 45673.19 msec +> ouch. +> +> I run VACCUUM ANALYZE once a day. +> +> Thanks, +> max +> +> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate +> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your +> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 18:49:34 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from email05.aon.at (WARSL401PIP4.highway.telekom.at [195.3.96.79]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 48A94476345 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:49:30 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 238034 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2003 23:49:32 -0000 +Received: from m160p030.dipool.highway.telekom.at (HELO cantor) + ([62.46.9.254]) (envelope-sender ) + by qmail5rs.highway.telekom.at (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP + for ; 12 Mar 2003 23:49:32 -0000 +From: Manfred Koizar +To: Max Baker +Cc: PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 00:48:27 +0100 +Message-ID: +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> +In-Reply-To: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> +X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/88 +X-Sequence-Number: 1386 + +On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:38:11 -0800, Max Baker wrote: +> -> Seq Scan on node (cost=0.00..107737.61 rows=35561 +> width=6) (actual time=6.73..44383.57 rows=34597 loops=1) + +35000 tuples in 100000 pages? + +>I run VACCUUM ANALYZE once a day. + +Try VACUUM FULL VERBOSE ANALAYZE; this should bring back your table +to a reasonable size. If the table starts growing again, VACUUM more +often. + +Servus + Manfred + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 20:00:21 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from cat (adsl-66-123-169-52.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [66.123.169.52]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E77C476356 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:00:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: by cat (Postfix, from userid 501) + id 45973B6D69; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:00:19 -0800 (PST) +Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:00:19 -0800 +From: Max Baker +To: Chad Thompson +Cc: PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +Message-ID: <20030313010018.GN30411@warped.org> +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> + <0ca601c2e8ea$6f7783d0$32021aac@chad> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <0ca601c2e8ea$6f7783d0$32021aac@chad> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/89 +X-Sequence-Number: 1387 + +On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 03:55:09PM -0700, Chad Thompson wrote: +> Ive found that group by works faster than distinct. +> +> Try +> EXPLAIN ANALYZE select mac from node group by mac; + +This was about 25% faster, thanks! + +That will work for distinct() only calls, but I still am looking for a +way to speed up the count() command. Maybe an internal counter of rows, +and triggers? + +-m + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 20:55:41 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from cat (adsl-66-123-169-52.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [66.123.169.52]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3DCF475A4B + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:55:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: by cat (Postfix, from userid 501) + id 59C78B6D69; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:55:41 -0800 (PST) +Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:55:40 -0800 +From: Max Baker +To: Manfred Koizar +Cc: PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +Message-ID: <20030313015540.GP30411@warped.org> +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> + +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: +User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/90 +X-Sequence-Number: 1388 + +On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 12:48:27AM +0100, Manfred Koizar wrote: +> On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:38:11 -0800, Max Baker wrote: +> > -> Seq Scan on node (cost=0.00..107737.61 rows=35561 +> > width=6) (actual time=6.73..44383.57 rows=34597 loops=1) +> +> 35000 tuples in 100000 pages? +> +> >I run VACCUUM ANALYZE once a day. +> +> Try VACUUM FULL VERBOSE ANALAYZE; this should bring back your table +> to a reasonable size. If the table starts growing again, VACUUM more +> often. + +Manfred, + +Thanks for the help. I guess i'm not clear on why there is so much +extra cruft. Does postgres leave a little bit behind every time it does +an update? Because this table is updated constantly. + +Check out the results, 1.5 seconds compared to 46 seconds : + +mydb=> vacuum full verbose analyze node; +NOTICE: --Relation node-- +NOTICE: Pages 107589: Changed 0, reaped 107588, Empty 0, New 0; Tup 34846: Vac 186847, Keep/VTL 0/0, UnUsed 9450103, MinLen 88, MaxLen 104; Re-using: Free/Avail. Space 837449444/837449368; EndEmpty/Avail. Pages 0/107588. + CPU 15.32s/0.51u sec elapsed 30.89 sec. +NOTICE: Index node_pkey: Pages 10412; Tuples 34846: Deleted 186847. + CPU 3.67s/2.48u sec elapsed 77.06 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_switch_port: Pages 54588; Tuples 34846: Deleted 186847. + CPU 9.59s/2.42u sec elapsed 273.50 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_switch: Pages 50069; Tuples 34846: Deleted 186847. + CPU 8.46s/2.08u sec elapsed 258.62 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_mac: Pages 6749; Tuples 34846: Deleted 186847. + CPU 2.19s/1.59u sec elapsed 56.05 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_switch_port_active: Pages 51138; Tuples 34846: Deleted 186847. + CPU 8.58s/2.99u sec elapsed 273.03 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_mac_active: Pages 6526; Tuples 34846: Deleted 186847. + CPU 1.75s/1.90u sec elapsed 46.70 sec. + NOTICE: Rel node: Pages: 107589 --> 399; Tuple(s) moved: 34303. + CPU 83.49s/51.73u sec elapsed 1252.35 sec. +NOTICE: Index node_pkey: Pages 10412; Tuples 34846: Deleted 34303. + CPU 3.65s/1.64u sec elapsed 72.99 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_switch_port: Pages 54650; Tuples 34846: Deleted 34303. + CPU 10.77s/2.05u sec elapsed 278.46 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_switch: Pages 50114; Tuples 34846: Deleted 34303. + CPU 9.95s/1.65u sec elapsed 266.55 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_mac: Pages 6749; Tuples 34846: Deleted 34303. + CPU 1.75s/1.13u sec elapsed 52.78 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_switch_port_active: Pages 51197; Tuples 34846: Deleted 34303. + CPU 10.48s/1.89u sec elapsed 287.46 sec. +NOTICE: Index idx_node_mac_active: Pages 6526; Tuples 34846: Deleted 34303. + CPU 2.16s/0.96u sec elapsed 48.67 sec. +NOTICE: --Relation pg_toast_64458-- +NOTICE: Pages 0: Changed 0, reaped 0, Empty 0, New 0; Tup 0: Vac 0, Keep/VTL 0/0, UnUsed 0, MinLen 0, MaxLen 0; Re-using: Free/Avail. Space 0/0; EndEmpty/Avail. Pages 0/0. + CPU 0.00s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.00 sec. +NOTICE: Index pg_toast_64458_idx: Pages 1; Tuples 0. + CPU 0.00s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.00 sec. +NOTICE: Analyzing node +VACUUM + +mydb=> EXPLAIN ANALYZE select distinct(mac) from node; +NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: + +Unique (cost=3376.37..3463.48 rows=3485 width=6) (actual time=1049.09..1400.45 rows=25340 loops=1) + -> Sort (cost=3376.37..3376.37 rows=34846 width=6) (actual time=1049.07..1190.58 rows=34846 loops=1) + -> Seq Scan on node (cost=0.00..747.46 rows=34846 width=6) (actual time=0.14..221.18 rows=34846 loops=1) +Total runtime: 1491.56 msec + +EXPLAIN + +now that's results =] +-m + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 21:00:11 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from joeconway.com (66-146-172-86.skyriver.net [66.146.172.86]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEDF8476358 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 21:00:08 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [192.168.5.3] (account jconway HELO joeconway.com) + by joeconway.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.4) + with ESMTP-TLS id 1662409; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:36:03 -0800 +Message-ID: <3E6FE59E.1050602@joeconway.com> +Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:57:50 -0800 +From: Joe Conway +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; + rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Max Baker +Cc: Manfred Koizar , + PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> + + <20030313015540.GP30411@warped.org> +In-Reply-To: <20030313015540.GP30411@warped.org> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/91 +X-Sequence-Number: 1389 + +Max Baker wrote: +> Thanks for the help. I guess i'm not clear on why there is so much +> extra cruft. Does postgres leave a little bit behind every time it does +> an update? Because this table is updated constantly. +> + +Yes. See: +http://www.us.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.3/postgres/routine-vacuuming.html + +Joe + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 21:05:46 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from cat (adsl-66-123-169-52.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [66.123.169.52]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA6A476350 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 21:05:45 -0500 (EST) +Received: by cat (Postfix, from userid 501) + id 449C7B6D69; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:05:47 -0800 (PST) +Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:05:47 -0800 +From: Max Baker +To: Joe Conway +Cc: Manfred Koizar , + PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +Message-ID: <20030313020546.GQ30411@warped.org> +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> + + <20030313015540.GP30411@warped.org> + <3E6FE59E.1050602@joeconway.com> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <3E6FE59E.1050602@joeconway.com> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/92 +X-Sequence-Number: 1390 + +On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 05:57:50PM -0800, Joe Conway wrote: +> Max Baker wrote: +> >Thanks for the help. I guess i'm not clear on why there is so much +> >extra cruft. Does postgres leave a little bit behind every time it does +> >an update? Because this table is updated constantly. +> > +> +> Yes. See: +> http://www.us.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.3/postgres/routine-vacuuming.html + +That would explain why once a night isn't enough. Thanks. +The contents of this table get refreshed every 4 hours. I'll add a +vacuum after every refresh and comapre the results in a couple days. + +-m + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 12 21:19:56 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFAA14758E6 + for ; + Wed, 12 Mar 2003 21:19:52 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2D2JtX01227 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:19:55 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101]) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h2D2Jo701134; + Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:19:50 +0800 (WST) +Message-ID: <099c01c2e907$0ede0770$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +To: "Max Baker" , "PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List" + +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:20:04 +0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/93 +X-Sequence-Number: 1391 + +Try setting up a trigger to maintain a separate table containing only the +distinct values... + +Chris + +----- Original Message ----- +From: "Max Baker" +To: "PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List" +Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 6:38 AM +Subject: [PERFORM] speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries + + +> I'm looking for a general method to +> speed up DISTINCT and COUNT queries. +> +> +> mydatabase=> EXPLAIN ANALYZE select distinct(mac) from node; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Unique (cost=110425.67..110514.57 rows=3556 width=6) (actual +> time=45289.78..45598.62 rows=25334 loops=1) +> -> Sort (cost=110425.67..110425.67 rows=35561 width=6) (actual +> time=45289.77..45411.53 rows=34597 loops=1) +> -> Seq Scan on node (cost=0.00..107737.61 rows=35561 +> width=6) (actual time=6.73..44383.57 rows=34597 loops=1) +> +> Total runtime: 45673.19 msec +> ouch. +> +> I run VACCUUM ANALYZE once a day. +> +> Thanks, +> max +> +> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate +> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your +> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly +> + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 13 10:43:01 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sabre.velocet.net (sabre.velocet.net [216.138.209.205]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 070E0476369 + for ; + Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:42:59 -0500 (EST) +Received: from stark.dyndns.tv (H162.C233.tor.velocet.net [216.138.233.162]) + by sabre.velocet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP + id C779F137F15; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:42:56 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=stark.dyndns.tv ident=foobar) + by stark.dyndns.tv with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) + id 18tUrA-0004ZO-00; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:42:56 -0500 +To: Max Baker +Cc: Joe Conway , Manfred Koizar , + PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> + + <20030313015540.GP30411@warped.org> <3E6FE59E.1050602@joeconway.com> + <20030313020546.GQ30411@warped.org> +In-Reply-To: <20030313020546.GQ30411@warped.org> +From: Greg Stark +Organization: The Emacs Conspiracy; member since 1992 +Date: 13 Mar 2003 10:42:55 -0500 +Message-ID: <874r67ff28.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Lines: 45 +User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Archive-Number: 200303/94 +X-Sequence-Number: 1392 + + +Max Baker writes: + +> On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 05:57:50PM -0800, Joe Conway wrote: +> > Max Baker wrote: +> > >Thanks for the help. I guess i'm not clear on why there is so much +> > >extra cruft. Does postgres leave a little bit behind every time it does +> > >an update? Because this table is updated constantly. +> > > +> > +> > Yes. See: +> > http://www.us.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.3/postgres/routine-vacuuming.html +> +> That would explain why once a night isn't enough. Thanks. +> The contents of this table get refreshed every 4 hours. I'll add a +> vacuum after every refresh and comapre the results in a couple days. + +If it gets completely refreshed, ie, every tuple is updated or deleted and +re-inserted in a big batch job then VACUUM might never be enough without +boosting some config values a lot. You might need to do a VACUUM FULL after +the refresh. VACUUM FULL locks the table though which might be unfortunate. + +VACUUM FULL should be sufficient but you might want to consider instead +TRUNCATE-ing the table and then reinserting records rather than deleting if +that's what you're doing. Or alternatively building the new data in a new +table and then doing a switcheroo with ALTER TABLE RENAME. However ALTER TABLE +(and possible TRUNCATE as well?) will invalidate functions and other objects +that refer to the table. + +Regarding the original question: + +. 7.4 will probably be faster than 7.3 at least if you stick with GROUP BY. + +. You could try building an index on mac, but I suspect even then it'll choose + the sequential scan. But try it with an index and enable_seqscan = off to + see if it's even worth trying to get it to use the index. If so you'll have + to lower random_page_cost and/or play with cpu_tuple_cost and other + variables to get it to do so. + +. You might also want to cluster the table on that index. You would have to + recluster it every time you do your refresh and it's not clear how much it + would help if any. But it might be worth trying. + +-- +greg + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 13 15:05:44 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [65.217.53.66]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6EA44758F1 + for ; + Thu, 13 Mar 2003 15:05:42 -0500 (EST) +Received: from thorn.mmrd.com (thorn.mmrd.com [172.25.10.100]) + by localhost.localdomain (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h2DKbf6P030427; + Thu, 13 Mar 2003 15:37:41 -0500 +Received: from gnvex001.mmrd.com (gnvex001.mmrd.com [192.168.3.55]) + by thorn.mmrd.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2DK5Up03833; + Thu, 13 Mar 2003 15:05:30 -0500 +Received: from camel.mmrd.com ([172.25.5.213]) by gnvex001.mmrd.com with SMTP + (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) + id F3HTJCH7; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 15:05:29 -0500 +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +From: Robert Treat +To: Greg Stark +Cc: Max Baker , Joe Conway , + Manfred Koizar , + PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +In-Reply-To: <874r67ff28.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> + + <20030313015540.GP30411@warped.org> <3E6FE59E.1050602@joeconway.com> + <20030313020546.GQ30411@warped.org> <874r67ff28.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 +Date: 13 Mar 2003 15:05:30 -0500 +Message-Id: <1047585930.23128.913.camel@camel> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/95 +X-Sequence-Number: 1393 + +On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 10:42, Greg Stark wrote: +> Max Baker writes: +> > On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 05:57:50PM -0800, Joe Conway wrote: +> > That would explain why once a night isn't enough. Thanks. +> > The contents of this table get refreshed every 4 hours. I'll add a +> > vacuum after every refresh and comapre the results in a couple days. +> +> If it gets completely refreshed, ie, every tuple is updated or deleted and +> re-inserted in a big batch job then VACUUM might never be enough without +> boosting some config values a lot. You might need to do a VACUUM FULL after +> the refresh. VACUUM FULL locks the table though which might be unfortunate. +> + +hmm... approx 35,000 records, getting updated every 4 hours. so.. + +35000 / (4*60) =~ 145 tuples per minute. + +Lets assume we want to keep any overhead at 10% or less, so we need to +lazy vacuum every 3500 updates. so... + +3500 tuples / 145 tpm =~ 25 minutes. + +So, set up a cron job to lazy vacuum every 20 minutes and see how that +works for you. + +Robert Treat + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 13 15:22:57 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from cat (adsl-66-123-169-52.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [66.123.169.52]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4207747580B + for ; + Thu, 13 Mar 2003 15:22:56 -0500 (EST) +Received: by cat (Postfix, from userid 501) + id 5151EB6D69; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 12:22:54 -0800 (PST) +Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 12:22:54 -0800 +From: Max Baker +To: Robert Treat +Cc: Greg Stark , Joe Conway , + Manfred Koizar , + PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +Message-ID: <20030313202254.GD30411@warped.org> +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> + + <20030313015540.GP30411@warped.org> + <3E6FE59E.1050602@joeconway.com> + <20030313020546.GQ30411@warped.org> + <874r67ff28.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> <1047585930.23128.913.camel@camel> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <1047585930.23128.913.camel@camel> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/96 +X-Sequence-Number: 1394 + +On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 03:05:30PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote: +> On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 10:42, Greg Stark wrote: +> > Max Baker writes: +> > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 05:57:50PM -0800, Joe Conway wrote: +> > > That would explain why once a night isn't enough. Thanks. +> > > The contents of this table get refreshed every 4 hours. I'll add a +> > > vacuum after every refresh and comapre the results in a couple days. +> > +> > If it gets completely refreshed, ie, every tuple is updated or deleted and +> > re-inserted in a big batch job then VACUUM might never be enough without +> > boosting some config values a lot. You might need to do a VACUUM FULL after +> > the refresh. VACUUM FULL locks the table though which might be unfortunate. + +I'm not starting with fresh data every time, I'm usually checking for +an existing record, then setting a timestamp and a boolean flag. + +I've run some profiling and it's about 8000-10,000 UPDATEs every 4 +hours. These are accompanied by about 800-1000 INSERTs. + +> hmm... approx 35,000 records, getting updated every 4 hours. so.. +> +> 35000 / (4*60) =~ 145 tuples per minute. +> +> Lets assume we want to keep any overhead at 10% or less, so we need to +> lazy vacuum every 3500 updates. so... +> +> 3500 tuples / 145 tpm =~ 25 minutes. +> +> So, set up a cron job to lazy vacuum every 20 minutes and see how that +> works for you. + +I'm now having VACUUM ANALYZE run after each of these updates. The data +comes in in spurts -- a 90 minute batch job that runs every 4 hours. + + +thanks folks, +-m + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 13 17:27:34 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from fuji.krosing.net (unknown [194.204.44.118]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC17F475AE4 + for ; + Thu, 13 Mar 2003 17:27:31 -0500 (EST) +Received: from fuji.krosing.net (lo [127.0.0.1]) + by fuji.krosing.net (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h2DMQLaG002067; + Fri, 14 Mar 2003 00:26:21 +0200 +Received: (from hannu@localhost) + by fuji.krosing.net (8.12.7/8.12.7/Submit) id h2DMQKZl002065; + Fri, 14 Mar 2003 00:26:20 +0200 +X-Authentication-Warning: fuji.krosing.net: hannu set sender to hannu@tm.ee + using -f +Subject: Re: Postgresql performance +From: Hannu Krosing +To: Enix Empreendimentos e =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Constru=E7=F5es?= "Ltda." + +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +In-Reply-To: <000701c2e8d8$95637b60$02ada8c0@enix> +References: <000701c2e8d8$95637b60$02ada8c0@enix> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Organization: +Message-Id: <1047594379.1709.98.camel@fuji.krosing.net> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-1) +Date: 14 Mar 2003 00:26:20 +0200 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/97 +X-Sequence-Number: 1395 + +Enix Empreendimentos e Constru=E7=F5es Ltda. kirjutas K, 12.03.2003 kell +22:47: +> Hi everybody. +>=20 +> I am a newbie to Postgresql, trying to migrate an application from MSAcce= +ss. +>=20 +> I am quite dissapointed with the problems I am facing with some queries +> containing multiple joins. + +Postgres currently does *not* optimize join order for explicit joins +(this is currently left as a cludge for users to hand-optimize query +plans). + +To get the benefits form optimiser you have to rewrite + +FROM TA JOIN TB ON TA.CB=3DTB.CB + +to=20 + +FROM A,B +WHERE TA.CB=3DTB.CB + +> I confess it has been hard for someone that is +> not a DBA to figure out which are the problems. Just to ilustrate, I have +> some queries that provide a reasonable query plan (at least from my point= + of +> view), but that return no result: keep running on and on. + +Could you try to explain it in other words (or give an example). I am +not native english speaker and I can read your text in at least 5 +different ways ;( + +> Is the performance of the mentioned Postgresql version much slower than t= +he +> 7.3.1? + +It can be slower. It may also be a little faster in some very specific +cases ;) + +-------------- +Hannu + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 14 12:12:05 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84144475E4D + for ; + Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:12:03 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2899651; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 09:11:55 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: Max Baker , + Robert Treat +Subject: Re: speeding up COUNT and DISTINCT queries +Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 09:10:06 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +Cc: Greg Stark , Joe Conway , + Manfred Koizar , + PostgreSQL Performance Mailing List +References: <20030312223811.GM30411@warped.org> + <1047585930.23128.913.camel@camel> + <20030313202254.GD30411@warped.org> +In-Reply-To: <20030313202254.GD30411@warped.org> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +Message-Id: <200303140910.06416.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/98 +X-Sequence-Number: 1396 + +Max, + +> I'm not starting with fresh data every time, I'm usually checking for +> an existing record, then setting a timestamp and a boolean flag. +> +> I've run some profiling and it's about 8000-10,000 UPDATEs every 4 +> hours. These are accompanied by about 800-1000 INSERTs. + +If these are wide records (i.e. large text fields or lots of columns ) you may +want to consider raising your max_fsm_relation in postgresql.conf slightly, +to about 15,000. + +You can get a better idea of a good FSM setting by running VACUUM FULL VERBOSE +after your next batch (this will lock the database temporarily) and seeing +how many data pages are "reclaimed", in total, by the vacuum. Then set your +FSM to at least that level. + +And has anyone mentioned REINDEX on this thread? + +-- +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 01:01:32 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from citidel1 (elaine.dlib.vt.edu [128.173.49.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C32647580B + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:01:30 -0500 (EST) +Received: from akrowne by citidel1 with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) + id 18uRD3-0002qe-00; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:01:25 -0500 +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:01:25 -0500 +From: Aaron Krowne +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Cc: akrowne@vt.edu +Subject: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> +Reply-To: Aaron Krowne +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/99 +X-Sequence-Number: 1397 + +Hi all. + +As the topic suggests, I am having fairly critical troubles with +postgresql on PlanetMath.org (a site which I run). You can go there and +try to pull up some entries and you will see the problem: everything is +incredibly slow. + +It is hard to pinpoint when this began happening, but I've tried a +variety of optimizations to fix it, all of which have failed. + +First: the machine. The machine is not too spectactular, but it is not +so bad that the performance currently witnessed should be happening. It +is a dual PIII-650 with 512MB of RAM and a 20gb IDE drive (yes, DMA is +on). There is plenty of free space on the drive. + +Now, the optimisations I have tried: + +- Using hash indices everywhere. A few months ago, I did this, and + there was a dramatic and instant speed up. However, this began + degenerating. I also noticed in the logs that there was deadlock + happening all over the place. The server response time was + intolerable so I figured the deadlock might have something to do with + this, and eliminated all hash indices (replaced with normal BTree + indices). + +- Going back to BTrees yielded a temporary respite, but soon enough the + server was back to half a minute to pull up an already-cached entry, + which is of course crazy. + +- I then tried increasing the machines shared memory max to 75% of the + physical memory, and scaled postgresql's buffers accordingly. This + also sped things up for a while, but again resulted in eventual + degeneration. Even worse, there were occasional crashes due to + running out of memory that (according to my calculations) shouldn't + have been happening. + +- Lastly, I tried reducing the shared memory max and limiting postgresql + to more conservative values, although still not to the out-of-box + values. Right now shared memory max on the system is 128mb, + postgres's shared buffers are at 64mb, sort_mem is at 16mb, and + effective cache size is at 10mb. + +For perspective, the size of the PlanetMath database dump is 24mb. It +should be able to fit in memory easily, so I'm not sure what I'm doing +wrong regarding the caching. + +For the most trivial request, Postgresql takes up basically all the CPU +for the duration of the request. The load average of the machine is +over-unity at all times, sometimes as bad as being the 30's. None of +this happens without postgres running, so it is definitely the culprit. + +The site averages about one hit every twenty seconds. This should not +be an overwhelming load, especially for what is just pulling up cached +information 99% of the time. + +Given this scenario, can anyone advise? I am particularly puzzled as to +why everything I tried initially helped, but always degenerated rather +rapidly to a near standstill. It seems to me that everything should be +able to be cached in memory with no problem, perhaps I need to force +this more explicitly. + +My next step, if I cannot fix this, is to try mysql =( + +Anyway, whoever helps would be doing a great service to many who use +PlanetMath =) It'd be much appreciated. + +Aaron Krowne + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 01:12:50 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (unknown [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBACA474E42 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:12:48 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id 5489521069; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 22:12:08 -0800 (PST) +Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 22:12:08 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Aaron Krowne +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/100 +X-Sequence-Number: 1398 + +> As the topic suggests, I am having fairly critical troubles with +> postgresql on PlanetMath.org (a site which I run). You can go there and +> try to pull up some entries and you will see the problem: everything is +> incredibly slow. + +Have you read the following? + +http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/performance-tips.html + +> First: the machine. The machine is not too spectactular, but it is not +> so bad that the performance currently witnessed should be happening. It +> is a dual PIII-650 with 512MB of RAM and a 20gb IDE drive (yes, DMA is +> on). There is plenty of free space on the drive. + +This shouldn't be an issue for the load you describe. A p-100 should +be okay, but it depends on your queries that you're performing. + +> Now, the optimisations I have tried: + +*) Stick with btree's. + +> - I then tried increasing the machines shared memory max to 75% of the +> physical memory, and scaled postgresql's buffers accordingly. This +> also sped things up for a while, but again resulted in eventual +> degeneration. Even worse, there were occasional crashes due to +> running out of memory that (according to my calculations) shouldn't +> have been happening. + +*) Don't do this, go back to near default levels. I bet this is + hurting your setup. + +> - Lastly, I tried reducing the shared memory max and limiting postgresql +> to more conservative values, although still not to the out-of-box +> values. Right now shared memory max on the system is 128mb, +> postgres's shared buffers are at 64mb, sort_mem is at 16mb, and +> effective cache size is at 10mb. + +*) You shouldn't have to do this either. + +> For perspective, the size of the PlanetMath database dump is 24mb. +> It should be able to fit in memory easily, so I'm not sure what I'm +> doing wrong regarding the caching. + +I hate to say this, but this sounds like a config error. :-/ + +> For the most trivial request, Postgresql takes up basically all the +> CPU for the duration of the request. The load average of the +> machine is over-unity at all times, sometimes as bad as being the +> 30's. None of this happens without postgres running, so it is +> definitely the culprit. + +*) Send an EXPLAIN statement as specified here: + +http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/performance-tips.html#USING-EXPLAIN + +> The site averages about one hit every twenty seconds. This should not +> be an overwhelming load, especially for what is just pulling up cached +> information 99% of the time. + +*) Have you done a vacuum analyze? + +http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/populate.html#POPULATE-ANALYZE + +> Given this scenario, can anyone advise? I am particularly puzzled +> as to why everything I tried initially helped, but always +> degenerated rather rapidly to a near standstill. It seems to me +> that everything should be able to be cached in memory with no +> problem, perhaps I need to force this more explicitly. + +*) Send the EXPLAIN output and we can work from there. + +> My next step, if I cannot fix this, is to try mysql =( + +Bah, don't throw down the gauntlet, it's pretty clear this is a local +issue and not a problem with the DB. :) + +-sc + +-- +Sean Chittenden + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 01:26:34 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C19C474E42 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:26:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2G6QXub018636; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:26:33 -0500 (EST) +To: Aaron Krowne +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-reply-to: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> +Comments: In-reply-to Aaron Krowne + message dated "Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:01:25 -0500" +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:26:32 -0500 +Message-ID: <18635.1047795992@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/101 +X-Sequence-Number: 1399 + +Aaron Krowne writes: +> As the topic suggests, I am having fairly critical troubles with +> postgresql on PlanetMath.org (a site which I run). + +Um ... not meaning to insult your intelligence, but how often do you +vacuum? Also, exactly what Postgres version are you running? Can +you show us EXPLAIN ANALYZE results for some of the slow queries? + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 01:39:33 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from joeconway.com (66-146-172-86.skyriver.net [66.146.172.86]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F72F474E42 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:39:32 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [192.168.5.3] (account jconway HELO joeconway.com) + by joeconway.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.4) + with ESMTP-TLS id 1665493; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 23:15:30 -0800 +Message-ID: <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> +Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 22:37:07 -0800 +From: Joe Conway +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; + rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Aaron Krowne +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> +In-Reply-To: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/102 +X-Sequence-Number: 1400 + +Aaron Krowne wrote: +> Given this scenario, can anyone advise? I am particularly puzzled as to +> why everything I tried initially helped, but always degenerated rather +> rapidly to a near standstill. It seems to me that everything should be +> able to be cached in memory with no problem, perhaps I need to force +> this more explicitly. + +Basic guidance: +- Keep shared memory use reasonable; your final settings of 64M shared + buffers and 16M sort_mem sound OK. In any case, be sure you're not + disk-swapping. +- If you don't already, run VACUUM ANALYZE on some regular schedule + (how often depends on your data turnover rate) +- Possibly consider running REINDEX periodically +- Post the SQL and EXPLAIN ANALYZE output for the queries causing the + worst of your woes to the list + +Explanations of these can be found by searching the list archives and +reading the related sections of the manual. + +A few questions: +- What version of Postgres? +- Have you run VACUUM FULL ANALYZE lately (or at least VACUUM ANALYZE)? +- Does the database see mostly SELECTs and INSERTs, or are there many + UPDATEs and/or DELETEs too? +- Are all queries slow, or particular ones? + +HTH, +Joe + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 02:52:13 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from citidel1 (elaine.dlib.vt.edu [128.173.49.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E24CE474E42 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 02:52:11 -0500 (EST) +Received: from akrowne by citidel1 with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) + id 18uSwA-00035w-00; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 02:52:06 -0500 +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 02:52:06 -0500 +From: Aaron Krowne +To: Joe Conway +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> +Reply-To: Aaron Krowne +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/103 +X-Sequence-Number: 1401 + +> - Keep shared memory use reasonable; your final settings of 64M shared +> buffers and 16M sort_mem sound OK. In any case, be sure you're not +> disk-swapping. + +Yeah, those seem like reasonable values to me. But I am not sure I'm +not disk-swapping, in fact it is almost certainly going on here bigtime. + +> - If you don't already, run VACUUM ANALYZE on some regular schedule +> (how often depends on your data turnover rate) + +I've done it here and there, especially when things seem slow. Never +seems to help much; the data turnover isn't high. + +> - Possibly consider running REINDEX periodically + +Ok thats a new one, I'll try that out. + +> - Post the SQL and EXPLAIN ANALYZE output for the queries causing the +> worst of your woes to the list +> - Are all queries slow, or particular ones? + +I'm grouping two separate things together to reply to, because the +second point answers the first: there's really no single culprit. Every +SELECT has a lag on the scale of a second; resolving all of the foreign +keys in various tables to construct a typical data-rich page piles up +many of these. I'm assuming the badness of this depends on how much +swapping is going on. + +> Explanations of these can be found by searching the list archives and +> reading the related sections of the manual. + +Will check that out, thanks. + +> A few questions: +> - What version of Postgres? + +7.2.1 + +> - Have you run VACUUM FULL ANALYZE lately (or at least VACUUM ANALYZE)? + +Yes, after a particularly bad slowdown... it didn't seem to fix things. + +> - Does the database see mostly SELECTs and INSERTs, or are there many +> UPDATEs and/or DELETEs too? + +Almost exclusively SELECTs. + +OK, I have just run a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE and things seem much better... +which would be the first time its really made a difference =) I tried +comparing an EXPLAIN ANALYZE of a single row select on the main objects +table before and after the vacuum, and the plan didn't change +(sequential scan still), but the response time went from ~1 second to +~5msec! I'm not really sure what could have happened here +behind-the-scenes since it didn't start using the index, and there +probably weren't more than 10% updated/added rows since the last VACUUM. + +I actually thought I had a task scheduled which was running a VACUUM +periodically, but maybe it broke for some reason or another. Still, I +have not been getting consistent results from running VACUUMs, so I'm +not entirely confident that the book is closed on the problem. + +Thanks for your help. + +apk + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 03:06:12 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from citidel1 (elaine.dlib.vt.edu [128.173.49.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFB22474E42 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:06:10 -0500 (EST) +Received: from akrowne by citidel1 with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) + id 18uT9d-0003Vv-00; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:06:01 -0500 +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:06:01 -0500 +From: Aaron Krowne +To: Sean Chittenden +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> +Reply-To: Aaron Krowne +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> + <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/104 +X-Sequence-Number: 1402 + +> Have you read the following? +> http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/performance-tips.html + +Yup. I would never go and bother real people without first checking the +manual, but I bet you get a lot of that =) + +> This shouldn't be an issue for the load you describe. A p-100 should +> be okay, but it depends on your queries that you're performing. + +Mostly just gather-retrieval based on unique identifier keys in a bunch +of tables. Really mundane stuff. + +> *) Stick with btree's. + +Yeah, that saddens me, though =) When I initially switched to hashes, +things were blazing. This application makes heavy use of keys and equal +comparisons on indices, so hashes are really the optimal index +structure. I'd like to be able to go back to using them some day... if +not for the concurrency issue, which seems like it should be fixable +(even having mutually exclusive locking on the entire index would +probably be fine for this application and would prevent deadlock). + +> > - I then tried increasing the machines shared memory max to 75% of the +> > physical memory, and scaled postgresql's buffers accordingly. This +> *) Don't do this, go back to near default levels. I bet this is +> hurting your setup. +> > - Lastly, I tried reducing the shared memory max and limiting postgresql +> > to more conservative values, although still not to the out-of-box +> > values. Right now shared memory max on the system is 128mb, +> > postgres's shared buffers are at 64mb, sort_mem is at 16mb, and +> > effective cache size is at 10mb. +> *) You shouldn't have to do this either. + +Well, I've now been advised that the best way is all 3 that I have tried +(among aggressive buffering, moderate buffering, and default +conservative buffering). + +Perhaps you could explain to me why the system shouldn't be ok with the +moderate set of buffer sizes on a 512mb machine? I don't really know +enough about the internals of postgres to be doing anything but voodoo +when I change the values. + +> I hate to say this, but this sounds like a config error. :-/ + +Thats better than a hardware error! This is what I wanted to hear =) + +> *) Have you done a vacuum analyze? + +See previous message to list (summary: it worked this time, but usually +it does not help.) + +Thanks, + +Aaron Krowne + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 03:21:06 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (unknown [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D724D474E42 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:21:03 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id 34DBC2107E; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 00:20:24 -0800 (PST) +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 00:20:24 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Aaron Krowne +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030316082024.GA66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> + <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/105 +X-Sequence-Number: 1403 + +> > > - Lastly, I tried reducing the shared memory max and limiting postgresql +> > > to more conservative values, although still not to the out-of-box +> > > values. Right now shared memory max on the system is 128mb, +> > > postgres's shared buffers are at 64mb, sort_mem is at 16mb, and +> > > effective cache size is at 10mb. +> > *) You shouldn't have to do this either. +> +> Well, I've now been advised that the best way is all 3 that I have +> tried (among aggressive buffering, moderate buffering, and default +> conservative buffering). +> +> Perhaps you could explain to me why the system shouldn't be ok with +> the moderate set of buffer sizes on a 512mb machine? I don't really +> know enough about the internals of postgres to be doing anything but +> voodoo when I change the values. + +Honestly? The defaults are small, but they're not small enough to +give you the lousy performance you were describing. If your buffers +are too high or there are enough things that are using up KVM/system +memory... contention can cause thashing/swapping which it wasn't clear +that you weren't having happen. Defaults shouldn't, under any +non-embedded circumstance cause problems with machines >233Mhz, +they're just too conservative to do any harm. :) + +> > *) Have you done a vacuum analyze? +> +> See previous message to list (summary: it worked this time, but +> usually it does not help.) + +Hrmm... ENOTFREEBSD, eh? + +http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/databases/postgresql7/files/502.pgsql?rev=1.5&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup + +You may want to setup a nightly vacuum/backup procedure. Palle +Girgensohn has written a really nice and simple +script that's been in use for ages on FreeBSD PostgreSQL installations +for making sure that you don't have this problem. + +Actually, it'd be really cool to lobby to get this script added to the +base PostgreSQL installation that way you wouldn't have this +problem... it'd also dramatically increase the number of nightly +backups performed for folks if a default script does this along with +vacuuming. -sc + + +-- +Sean Chittenden + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 03:30:17 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from citidel1 (elaine.dlib.vt.edu [128.173.49.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8D52475F0D + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:30:14 -0500 (EST) +Received: from akrowne by citidel1 with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) + id 18uTX1-0003bB-00; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:30:11 -0500 +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:30:11 -0500 +From: Aaron Krowne +To: Sean Chittenden +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030316083011.GG19570@vt.edu> +Reply-To: Aaron Krowne +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> + <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> + <20030316082024.GA66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <20030316082024.GA66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/106 +X-Sequence-Number: 1404 + +> You may want to setup a nightly vacuum/backup procedure. Palle +> Girgensohn has written a really nice and simple +> script that's been in use for ages on FreeBSD PostgreSQL installations +> for making sure that you don't have this problem. +> +> Actually, it'd be really cool to lobby to get this script added to the +> base PostgreSQL installation that way you wouldn't have this +> problem... it'd also dramatically increase the number of nightly +> backups performed for folks if a default script does this along with +> vacuuming. -sc + +*Actually*, I just double checked, and I was not hallucinating: I *do* +have a nightly vacuum script... because Debian postgres comes with it =) + +So, either it is broken, or doing a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE rather than just +VACUUM ANALYZE made all the difference. Is this possible (the latter, +we know the former is possible...)? + +apk + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 03:36:23 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (unknown [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 580F0475AD4 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:36:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id E1E702107E; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 00:35:37 -0800 (PST) +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 00:35:37 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Aaron Krowne +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030316083537.GB66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> + <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> + <20030316082024.GA66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316083011.GG19570@vt.edu> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <20030316083011.GG19570@vt.edu> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/107 +X-Sequence-Number: 1405 + +> > You may want to setup a nightly vacuum/backup procedure. Palle +> > Girgensohn has written a really nice and simple +> > script that's been in use for ages on FreeBSD PostgreSQL installations +> > for making sure that you don't have this problem. +> > +> > Actually, it'd be really cool to lobby to get this script added to the +> > base PostgreSQL installation that way you wouldn't have this +> > problem... it'd also dramatically increase the number of nightly +> > backups performed for folks if a default script does this along with +> > vacuuming. -sc +> +> *Actually*, I just double checked, and I was not hallucinating: I *do* +> have a nightly vacuum script... because Debian postgres comes with it =) + +Cool, glad to hear other installations are picking up doing this. + +> So, either it is broken, or doing a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE rather than just +> VACUUM ANALYZE made all the difference. Is this possible (the latter, +> we know the former is possible...)? + +You shouldn't have to do a VACUUM FULL. Upgrade your PostgreSQL +installation if you can (most recent if possible), there have been +many performance updates and VACUUM fixes worth noting. Check the +release notes starting with your version and read through them up to +the current release... you'll be amazed at all the work that's been +done, some of which it looks like may affect your installation. + +http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/release.html + +-sc + +-- +Sean Chittenden + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 03:37:34 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79DC1475AE5 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:37:32 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2G8bWub019395; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:37:32 -0500 (EST) +To: Aaron Krowne +Cc: Sean Chittenden , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-reply-to: <20030316083011.GG19570@vt.edu> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> + <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> + <20030316082024.GA66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316083011.GG19570@vt.edu> +Comments: In-reply-to Aaron Krowne + message dated "Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:30:11 -0500" +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:37:32 -0500 +Message-ID: <19394.1047803852@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/108 +X-Sequence-Number: 1406 + +Aaron Krowne writes: +> So, either it is broken, or doing a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE rather than just +> VACUUM ANALYZE made all the difference. Is this possible (the latter, +> we know the former is possible...)? + +If your FSM parameters in postgresql.conf are too small, then plain +vacuums might have failed to keep up with the available free space, +leading to a situation where vacuum full is essential. Did you happen +to notice whether the vacuum full shrunk the database's disk footprint +noticeably? + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 06:31:29 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from joeconway.com (66-146-172-86.skyriver.net [66.146.172.86]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44F16474E42 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 06:31:26 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [192.168.5.3] (account jconway HELO joeconway.com) + by joeconway.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.4) + with ESMTP-TLS id 1665605; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 04:07:37 -0800 +Message-ID: <3E74600A.8050902@joeconway.com> +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:29:14 -0800 +From: Joe Conway +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; + rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Aaron Krowne +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> +In-Reply-To: <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/109 +X-Sequence-Number: 1407 + +Aaron Krowne wrote: +>>- What version of Postgres? +> 7.2.1 + +You should definitely look at upgrading, at least to 7.2.4 (which you +can do without requiring a dump/reload cycle), but better yet to 7.3.2 +(which will require a dump/reload cycle). I don't know that will fix you +specific issue, but there were some critical bug fixes between 7.2.1 and +7.2.4. + +>>- Does the database see mostly SELECTs and INSERTs, or are there many +>> UPDATEs and/or DELETEs too? +> +> Almost exclusively SELECTs. +> +> OK, I have just run a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE and things seem much better... + +Hmmm, do you periodically do large updates or otherwise turn over rows +in batches? + +> which would be the first time its really made a difference =) I tried +> comparing an EXPLAIN ANALYZE of a single row select on the main objects +> table before and after the vacuum, and the plan didn't change +> (sequential scan still), but the response time went from ~1 second to +> ~5msec! I'm not really sure what could have happened here +> behind-the-scenes since it didn't start using the index, and there +> probably weren't more than 10% updated/added rows since the last VACUUM. + +If your app is mostly doing equi-lookups by primary key, and indexes +aren't being used (I think I saw you mention that on another post), then +something else is still wrong. Please pick one or two typical queries +that are doing seq scans and post the related table definitions, +indexes, SQL, and EXPLAIN ANALYZE. I'd bet you are getting bitten by a +datatype mismatch or something. + +Joe + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 16 21:08:27 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D8B4475B47 + for ; + Sun, 16 Mar 2003 21:08:24 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2H28RL21189 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:08:27 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101]) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h2H28C721094; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:08:14 +0800 (WST) +Message-ID: <021301c2ec2a$10cfca70$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +To: "Aaron Krowne" , + +Cc: +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:08:10 +0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/110 +X-Sequence-Number: 1408 + +> - Lastly, I tried reducing the shared memory max and limiting postgresql +> to more conservative values, although still not to the out-of-box +> values. Right now shared memory max on the system is 128mb, +> postgres's shared buffers are at 64mb, sort_mem is at 16mb, and +> effective cache size is at 10mb. + +I found that 5000 shared buffers was best performance on my system. +However, your problems are probably due to maybe not running vacuum, +analyze, reindex, etc. Your queries may not be effectively indexed - +EXPLAIN ANALYZE them all. + +Chris + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 01:10:19 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (unknown [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73F78474E53 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:10:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id 431AF20F01; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 22:10:11 -0800 (PST) +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 22:10:11 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Logan Bowers +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> + +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/112 +X-Sequence-Number: 1410 + +> I don't know what your definition of "high" is, but I do find that +> turnover can degrade performance over time. Perhaps one of the devs +> can enlighten me, but I have a database that turns over ~100,000 +> rows/day that does appear to slowly get worse. The updates are done +> in batches and I "VACUUM" and "VACUUM ANALYZE" after each batch +> (three/day) but I found that over time simple queries would start to +> hit the disk more and more. + +Creeping index syndrome. Tom recently fixed this in HEAD. Try the +latest copy from the repo and see if this solves your problems. + +> A "select count(*) FROM tblwordidx" initially took about 1 second to +> return a count of 2 million but after a few months it took several +> minutes of really hard HDD grinding. + +That's because there are dead entries in the index that weren't being +reused or cleaned up. As I said, this has been fixed. + +-sc + + +PS It's good to see you around again. :) + +-- +Sean Chittenden + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 01:05:37 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from neo.magick.org (bowerslc-2.student.rose-hulman.edu + [137.112.146.57]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF018474E53 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:05:35 -0500 (EST) +Received: from neo.magick.org (logan@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by neo.magick.org (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h2H6Cahn014783 + for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:12:36 -0500 +Received: from localhost (logan@localhost) + by neo.magick.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) with ESMTP id h2H6CZFg014780 + for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:12:35 -0500 +X-Authentication-Warning: neo.magick.org: logan owned process doing -bs +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:12:34 -0500 (EST) +From: Logan Bowers +X-X-Sender: logan@neo.magick.org +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-Reply-To: <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> +Message-ID: +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-Archive-Number: 200303/111 +X-Sequence-Number: 1409 + +I don't know what your definition of "high" is, but I do find that +turnover can degrade performance over time. Perhaps one of the devs can +enlighten me, but I have a database that turns over ~100,000 rows/day that +does appear to slowly get worse. The updates are done in batches and I +"VACUUM" and "VACUUM ANALYZE" after each batch (three/day) but I found +that over time simple queries would start to hit the disk more and more. + +A "select count(*) FROM tblwordidx" initially took about 1 second to +return a count of 2 million but after a few months it took several minutes +of really hard HDD grinding. Also, the database only had a couple hundred +megs of data in it, but the db was taking up 8-9 GB of disk space. I'm +thinking data fragmentation is ruining cache performance? When I did a +dump restore and updated from 7.2.1 to 7.3.1 queries were zippy again. +But, now it is starting to slow... I have yet to measure the effects of a +VACUUM FULL, however. I'll try it an report back... + + +Logan Bowers + +On Sun, 16 Mar 2003, Aaron Krowne wrote: + + +> I've done it here and there, especially when things seem slow. Never +> seems to help much; the data turnover isn't high. +> + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 01:19:00 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from bob.samurai.com (bob.samurai.com [205.207.28.75]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95CF5475FD9 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:18:59 -0500 (EST) +Received: from samurai.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by bob.samurai.com (Postfix) with SMTP + id 4DBFA1D60; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:18:59 -0500 (EST) +Received: from du150.n224.resnet.queensu.ca ([130.15.224.150]) + (SquirrelMail authenticated user neilc) + by mailbox.samurai.com with HTTP; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:18:59 -0500 (EST) +Message-ID: <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:18:59 -0500 (EST) +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +From: "Neil Conway" +To: +In-Reply-To: <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> + + <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> +X-Priority: 3 +Importance: Normal +Cc: , +X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.11) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/113 +X-Sequence-Number: 1411 + +Sean Chittenden said: +>> A "select count(*) FROM tblwordidx" initially took about 1 second to +>> return a count of 2 million but after a few months it took several +>> minutes of really hard HDD grinding. +> +> That's because there are dead entries in the index that weren't being +> reused or cleaned up. As I said, this has been fixed. + +That's doubtful: "select count(*) FROM foo" won't use an index. There are +a bunch of other factors (e.g. dead heap tuples, changes in the pages +cached in the buffer, disk fragmentation, etc.) that could effect +performance in that situation, however. + +Cheers, + +Neil + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 01:29:31 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (unknown [69.1.70.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6510D474E53 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:29:30 -0500 (EST) +Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id 425E62106B; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 22:29:29 -0800 (PST) +Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 22:29:29 -0800 +From: Sean Chittenden +To: Neil Conway +Cc: logan@datacurrent.com, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030317062929.GI23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> + + <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i +X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org +X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 +X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ +X-Archive-Number: 200303/114 +X-Sequence-Number: 1412 + +> >> A "select count(*) FROM tblwordidx" initially took about 1 second to +> >> return a count of 2 million but after a few months it took several +> >> minutes of really hard HDD grinding. +> > +> > That's because there are dead entries in the index that weren't being +> > reused or cleaned up. As I said, this has been fixed. +> +> That's doubtful: "select count(*) FROM foo" won't use an +> index. There are a bunch of other factors (e.g. dead heap tuples, +> changes in the pages cached in the buffer, disk fragmentation, etc.) +> that could effect performance in that situation, however. + +*blush* Yeah, jumped the gun on that when I read that queries were +getting slower (churn of an index == slow creaping death for +performance). A SELECT COUNT(*), however, wouldn't be affected by the +index growth problem. Is the COUNT() on a view that uses an index? I +haven't had any real problems with this kind of degredation outside of +indexes. :-/ -sc + +-- +Sean Chittenden + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 01:34:29 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D48A474E53 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:34:27 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2H6YLub000496; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:34:21 -0500 (EST) +To: "Neil Conway" +Cc: sean@chittenden.org, logan@datacurrent.com, + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-reply-to: <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> + + <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> +Comments: In-reply-to "Neil Conway" + message dated "Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:18:59 -0500" +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:34:20 -0500 +Message-ID: <495.1047882860@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/115 +X-Sequence-Number: 1413 + +"Neil Conway" writes: +> Sean Chittenden said: +> A "select count(*) FROM tblwordidx" initially took about 1 second to +> return a count of 2 million but after a few months it took several +> minutes of really hard HDD grinding. +>> +>> That's because there are dead entries in the index that weren't being +>> reused or cleaned up. As I said, this has been fixed. + +> That's doubtful: "select count(*) FROM foo" won't use an index. + +To know what's going on, as opposed to guessing about it, we'd need to +know something about the physical sizes of the table and its indexes. +"vacuum verbose" output would be instructive... + +But my best theorizing-in-advance-of-the-data guess is that Logan's +FSM settings are too small, causing free space to be leaked over time. +If a vacuum full restores the original performance then that's probably +the right answer. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 10:58:45 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sabre.velocet.net (sabre.velocet.net [216.138.209.205]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45EBF475EDF + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:58:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: from stark.dyndns.tv (H162.C233.tor.velocet.net [216.138.233.162]) + by sabre.velocet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 580B6137FC9; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:58:42 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=stark.dyndns.tv ident=foobar) + by stark.dyndns.tv with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) + id 18ux0Z-0000Fc-00; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:58:40 -0500 +To: Tom Lane +Cc: Aaron Krowne , Sean Chittenden , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> + <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> + <20030316082024.GA66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316083011.GG19570@vt.edu> <19394.1047803852@sss.pgh.pa.us> +In-Reply-To: <19394.1047803852@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Greg Stark +Organization: The Emacs Conspiracy; member since 1992 +Date: 17 Mar 2003 10:58:39 -0500 +Message-ID: <87hea2assw.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Lines: 22 +User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Archive-Number: 200303/116 +X-Sequence-Number: 1414 + +Tom Lane writes: + +> Aaron Krowne writes: +> > So, either it is broken, or doing a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE rather than just +> > VACUUM ANALYZE made all the difference. Is this possible (the latter, +> > we know the former is possible...)? +> +> If your FSM parameters in postgresql.conf are too small, then plain +> vacuums might have failed to keep up with the available free space, +> leading to a situation where vacuum full is essential. Did you happen +> to notice whether the vacuum full shrunk the database's disk footprint +> noticeably? + +This seems to be a frequent problem. + +Is there any easy way to check an existing table for lost free space? + +Is there any way vauum could do this check and print a warning suggesting +using vaccuum full and/or increasing fsm parameters if it finds such? + +-- +greg + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 11:11:05 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B42A5475FEE + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 11:11:02 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2HGB5ub006662; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 11:11:05 -0500 (EST) +To: Greg Stark +Cc: Aaron Krowne , Sean Chittenden , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-reply-to: <87hea2assw.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> + <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> + <20030316082024.GA66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316083011.GG19570@vt.edu> <19394.1047803852@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <87hea2assw.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Comments: In-reply-to Greg Stark + message dated "17 Mar 2003 10:58:39 -0500" +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 11:11:05 -0500 +Message-ID: <6661.1047917465@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/117 +X-Sequence-Number: 1415 + +Greg Stark writes: +> Is there any easy way to check an existing table for lost free space? + +contrib/pgstattuple gives a pretty good set of statistics. (I thought +VACUUM VERBOSE printed something about total free space in a table, +but apparently only VACUUM FULL VERBOSE does. Maybe should change +that.) + +> Is there any way vauum could do this check and print a warning suggesting +> using vaccuum full and/or increasing fsm parameters if it finds such? + +In CVS tip, a whole-database VACUUM VERBOSE gives info about the free +space map occupancy, eg + +INFO: Free space map: 224 relations, 450 pages stored; 3776 total pages needed. + Allocated FSM size: 1000 relations + 20000 pages = 178 KB shared mem. + +If the "pages needed" number is drastically larger than the allocated +FSM size, you've got a problem. (I don't think you need to panic if +it's just a little larger, though. 10X bigger would be time to do +something, 2X bigger maybe not.) + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 12:12:32 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from irko.smoothcorp.com (unknown [208.49.241.41]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01301475E91 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 12:12:31 -0500 (EST) +Received: from taurus.ifloor.com ([10.0.1.20] helo=taurus.smoothcorp.com) + by irko.smoothcorp.com with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18uyA7-0006yx-00 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:12:35 -0800 +Received: from localhost (chris@localhost) + by taurus.smoothcorp.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2HHCWu07755 + for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:12:32 -0800 +X-Authentication-Warning: taurus.smoothcorp.com: chris owned process doing -bs +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:12:32 -0800 (PST) +From: Chris Sutton +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-Reply-To: <6661.1047917465@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false +X-Archive-Number: 200303/118 +X-Sequence-Number: 1416 + +On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Tom Lane wrote: + +> In CVS tip, a whole-database VACUUM VERBOSE gives info about the free +> space map occupancy, eg +> +> INFO: Free space map: 224 relations, 450 pages stored; 3776 total pages needed. +> Allocated FSM size: 1000 relations + 20000 pages = 178 KB shared mem. +> + +How do you get this information? + +I just ran VACUUM VERBOSE and it spit out a bunch of information per +relation, but nothing about total relations and FSM space. We are running +7.3.2. + +Chris + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 12:38:41 2003 +X-Original-To: Pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98B6A475E91 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 12:38:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2906058 for Pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:38:33 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: Pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Performance on large data transformations +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:38:38 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +Message-Id: <200303170938.38365.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/119 +X-Sequence-Number: 1417 + +Folks, + +On one database, I have an overnight data transformation procedure that goes +like: + +TableA has about 125,000 records. + +Begin Transaction: +1) Update 80% of records in TableA +2) Update 10% of records in TableA +3) Update 65% of records in TableA +4) Update 55% of records in TableA +5) Update 15% or records in TableA with references to other records in TableA +6) Flag what hasn't been updated. +Commit + +I've found that, no matter what my FSM settings (I've gone as high as +1,000,000) by the time I reach step 4 execution has slowed down considerably, +and for step 5 it takes the server more than 10 minutes to complete the +update statement. During this period, CPU, RAM and disk I/O are almost idle +... the system seems to spend all of its time doing lengthy seeks. There is, +for that matter, no kernel swap activity, but I'm not sure how to measure +Postgres temp file activity. + +(FYI: Dual Athalon 1600mhz/1gb/Hardware Raid 1 with xlog on seperate SCSI +drive/Red Hat Linux 8.0/PostgreSQL 7.2.4) + +The only way around this I've found is to break up the above into seperate +transactions with VACUUMs in between, and "simulate" a transaction by making +a back-up copy of the table and restoring from it if something goes wrong. +I've tried enough different methods to be reasonably certain that there is no +way around this in 7.2.4. + +The reason I bring this up is that PostgreSQL's dramatic plunge in performance +in large serial updates is really problematic for us in the OLAP database +market, where large data transformations, as well as extensive use of +calculated temporary tables, is common. I was particularly distressed when +I had to tell a client considering switching from MSSQL to Postgres for an +OLAP database that they might just be trading one set of problems for +another. + +Is there any way we can improve on this kind of operation in future versions +of PostgreSQL? + +-- +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 13:33:38 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from cat (adsl-66-123-169-52.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [66.123.169.52]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EB2F475FD9 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 13:33:29 -0500 (EST) +Received: by cat (Postfix, from userid 501) + id 95758B6D69; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:33:27 -0800 (PST) +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:33:27 -0800 +From: Max Baker +To: Tom Lane +Cc: Aaron Krowne , Sean Chittenden , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030317183327.GC25487@warped.org> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> + <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> + <20030316082024.GA66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316083011.GG19570@vt.edu> <19394.1047803852@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <19394.1047803852@sss.pgh.pa.us> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/120 +X-Sequence-Number: 1418 + +On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 03:37:32AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: +> Aaron Krowne writes: +> > So, either it is broken, or doing a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE rather than just +> > VACUUM ANALYZE made all the difference. Is this possible (the latter, +> > we know the former is possible...)? +> +> If your FSM parameters in postgresql.conf are too small, then plain +> vacuums might have failed to keep up with the available free space, +> leading to a situation where vacuum full is essential. Did you happen +> to notice whether the vacuum full shrunk the database's disk footprint +> noticeably? + +I was having a similar problem a couple threads ago, and a VACUUM FULL +reduced my database from 3.9 gigs to 2.1 gigs ! + +So my question is how to (smartly) choose an FSM size? + +thanks, +max` + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 14:20:12 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from bob.samurai.com (bob.samurai.com [205.207.28.75]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10FF1475AE5 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:20:10 -0500 (EST) +Received: from samurai.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by bob.samurai.com (Postfix) with SMTP + id 491D61D97; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:20:10 -0500 (EST) +Received: from du150.n224.resnet.queensu.ca ([130.15.224.150]) + (SquirrelMail authenticated user neilc) + by mailbox.samurai.com with HTTP; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:20:10 -0500 (EST) +Message-ID: <34144.130.15.224.150.1047928810.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:20:10 -0500 (EST) +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +From: "Neil Conway" +To: +In-Reply-To: +References: <6661.1047917465@sss.pgh.pa.us> + +X-Priority: 3 +Importance: Normal +Cc: +X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.11) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/121 +X-Sequence-Number: 1419 + +Chris Sutton said: +> On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Tom Lane wrote: +>> In CVS tip, a whole-database VACUUM VERBOSE gives info about the free +>> space map occupancy, eg + +> How do you get this information? +> +> I just ran VACUUM VERBOSE and it spit out a bunch of information per +> relation, but nothing about total relations and FSM space. We are +> running 7.3.2. + +As Tom mentioned, that information is printed by a database-wide VACUUM +VERBOSE "in CVS tip" -- i.e. in the development code that will eventually +become PostgreSQL 7.4 + +Cheers, + +Neil + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 14:26:02 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB8CC475F09 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:26:00 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2HJQ0ub007700; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:26:01 -0500 (EST) +To: Chris Sutton +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-reply-to: +References: +Comments: In-reply-to Chris Sutton + message dated "Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:12:32 -0800" +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:26:00 -0500 +Message-ID: <7699.1047929160@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/122 +X-Sequence-Number: 1420 + +Chris Sutton writes: +> On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Tom Lane wrote: +>> In CVS tip, a whole-database VACUUM VERBOSE gives info about the free +>> space map occupancy, eg +>> INFO: Free space map: 224 relations, 450 pages stored; 3776 total pages needed. +>> Allocated FSM size: 1000 relations + 20000 pages = 178 KB shared mem. + +> How do you get this information? + +Before CVS tip, you don't. + +[ thinks...] Perhaps we could back-port the FSM changes into 7.3 ... +it would be a larger change than I'd usually consider reasonable for a +stable branch, though. Particularly considering that it would be hard +to call it a bug fix. By any sane definition this is a new feature, +and we have a policy against putting new features in stable branches. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 14:47:40 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mail.libertyrms.com (unknown [209.167.124.227]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DF60475FD9 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:47:38 -0500 (EST) +Received: from andrew by mail.libertyrms.com with local (Exim 3.22 #3 + (Debian)) + id 18v0aA-0005pn-00 + for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:47:38 -0500 +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:47:38 -0500 +From: Andrew Sullivan +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030317144738.O3789@mail.libertyrms.com> +Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +References: + <7699.1047929160@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i +In-Reply-To: <7699.1047929160@sss.pgh.pa.us>; + from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us on Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 02:26:00PM -0500 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/123 +X-Sequence-Number: 1421 + +On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 02:26:00PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: +> [ thinks...] Perhaps we could back-port the FSM changes into 7.3 ... + +For what it's worth, I think that'd be a terrible precedent. Perhaps +making a patch file akin to what the Postgres-R folks do, for people +who really want it. But there is just no way it's a bug fix, and one +of the things I _really really_ like about Postgres is the way +"stable" means stable. Introducing such a new feature to 7.3.x now +smacks to me of the direction the Linux kernal has gone, where major +new funcitonality gets "merged"[1] in dot-releases of the so-called +stable version. + +[1] This is the meaning of "merge" also used in Toronto on the 401 at +rush hour. 8 lanes of traffic jam and growing. + +-- +---- +Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street +Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada + M2P 2A8 + +1 416 646 3304 x110 + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 15:14:58 2003 +X-Original-To: Pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from torque.intervideoinc.com (mail.intervideo.com + [206.112.112.151]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724A7475E91 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 15:14:56 -0500 (EST) +Received: from ronpc [63.68.5.2] by torque.intervideoinc.com + (SMTPD32-5.05) id A16640B0082; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 12:34:46 -0800 +From: "Ron Mayer" +To: "Josh Berkus" , + +Cc: +Subject: Re: Performance on large data transformations +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 12:06:39 -0800 +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 +In-Reply-To: <200303170938.38365.josh@agliodbs.com> +Importance: Normal +X-Archive-Number: 200303/124 +X-Sequence-Number: 1422 + +Josh Berkus wrote: +> +>There is, for that matter, no kernel swap activity, but I'm not +>sure how to measure Postgres temp file activity. + +Of course you could: + + mv /wherever/data/base/16556/pgsql_tmp /some_other_disk/ + ln -s /some_other_disk/pgsql_tmp /wherever/data/base/16556 + +and use "iostat" from the "systat" package to watch how much you're +using the disk the temp directory's on. + + +In fact, for OLAP stuff I've had this help performance because +quite a few data warehousing operations look like: + First read from main database, + do a big hash-or-sort, (which gets written to pgsql_tmp), + then read from this temporary table and write result to main database + +PS: Yes, I know this doesn't help the FSM stuff you asked about. + + + Ron + + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 15:46:07 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55C22474E53 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 15:46:06 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2HKk6ub008238; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 15:46:06 -0500 (EST) +To: Andrew Sullivan +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-reply-to: <20030317144738.O3789@mail.libertyrms.com> +References: + <7699.1047929160@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <20030317144738.O3789@mail.libertyrms.com> +Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Sullivan + message dated "Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:47:38 -0500" +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 15:46:06 -0500 +Message-ID: <8237.1047933966@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/125 +X-Sequence-Number: 1423 + +Andrew Sullivan writes: +> On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 02:26:00PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: +>> [ thinks...] Perhaps we could back-port the FSM changes into 7.3 ... + +> For what it's worth, I think that'd be a terrible precedent. + +Oh, I quite agree. I was just throwing up the option to see if anyone +thought the issue was important enough to take risks for. I do not... + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 17:46:30 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from hotmail.com (bay1-f104.bay1.hotmail.com [65.54.245.104]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EA64475461 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 17:46:28 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:46:30 -0800 +Received: from 205.229.142.209 by by1fd.bay1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 22:46:30 GMT +X-Originating-IP: [205.229.142.209] +From: "Kendrick C. Wilson" +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:46:30 -0600 +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed +Message-ID: +X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Mar 2003 22:46:30.0558 (UTC) + FILETIME=[0D54CBE0:01C2ECD7] +X-Archive-Number: 200303/126 +X-Sequence-Number: 1424 + +What is the structure of you table? +Is the data types in the table the same as in the SQL.... + +Did you create the index after the loading the table? +cluster the table around the most used index.... + +Is you web site on the same box you database is on? + +telnet www.planetmath.org 5432 +oh, $hit... + +never mind........ + +If you have another box, please put the database on it. The web server maybe +killing the database but this depends on the amount of traffic. +and block the port......... + + +How fast is you hard drive? 5400rpm :S, + +k=n^r/ck, SCJP + +_________________________________________________________________ +MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* +http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 18:14:52 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8314E475461 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 18:14:51 -0500 (EST) +Received: from ladamski (12-236-241-34.client.attbi.com[12.236.241.34]) + by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP + id <2003031723145300200rpt5le>; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:14:53 +0000 +From: "Lucas Adamski" +To: "'Kendrick C. Wilson'" , + +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 15:15:04 -0800 +Message-ID: <000e01c2ecdb$0bafd1a0$0200a8c0@LADAMSKI> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) +Importance: Normal +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 +In-Reply-To: +X-Archive-Number: 200303/127 +X-Sequence-Number: 1425 + +Or at least restrict TCP/IP connections from localhost only, and use SSH +tunnels if you must have direct external access (for pgAdmin, etc.) to the +DB. + Lucas. + +-----Original Message----- +From: Kendrick C. Wilson [mailto:kendrick_wilson@hotmail.com] +Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 2:47 PM +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org + + +What is the structure of you table? +Is the data types in the table the same as in the SQL.... + +Did you create the index after the loading the table? +cluster the table around the most used index.... + +Is you web site on the same box you database is on? + +telnet www.planetmath.org 5432 +oh, $hit... + +never mind........ + +If you have another box, please put the database on it. The web server maybe +killing the database but this depends on the amount of traffic. +and block the port......... + + +How fast is you hard drive? 5400rpm :S, + +k=n^r/ck, SCJP + +_________________________________________________________________ +MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* +http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus + + +---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? + +http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 20:34:37 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A55E5475F09 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 20:34:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2I1Yac95711 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:34:36 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101]) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h2I1YW795594; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:34:32 +0800 (WST) +Message-ID: <07b501c2ecee$8917b8c0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +To: "Kendrick C. Wilson" , + +References: +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:34:36 +0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/128 +X-Sequence-Number: 1426 + + + +> What is the structure of you table? +> Is the data types in the table the same as in the SQL.... +> +> Did you create the index after the loading the table? +> cluster the table around the most used index.... + +There is no point clustering a table around the most used index, unless +access to the index is non-random. eg. you are picking up more than one +consecutive entry from the index at a time. eg. Indexes on foreign keys are +excellent for clustering. + +Chris + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 21:31:42 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from citidel1 (elaine.dlib.vt.edu [128.173.49.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98B334762E0 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:31:40 -0500 (EST) +Received: from akrowne by citidel1 with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) + id 18v6ss-0001ef-00; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:31:22 -0500 +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:31:22 -0500 +From: Aaron Krowne +To: Tom Lane +Cc: Sean Chittenden , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Message-ID: <20030318023122.GN3703@vt.edu> +Reply-To: Aaron Krowne +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> + <20030316061208.GA62529@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316080601.GF19570@vt.edu> + <20030316082024.GA66903@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <20030316083011.GG19570@vt.edu> <19394.1047803852@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <19394.1047803852@sss.pgh.pa.us> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i +X-Archive-Number: 200303/129 +X-Sequence-Number: 1427 + +I should have paid more attention to the disk space before... but it +looks like somewhere between half a gig and a gig was freed! The disk +footprint is about a gig now. + +Aaron Krowne + +On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 03:37:32AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: +> Aaron Krowne writes: +> > So, either it is broken, or doing a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE rather than just +> > VACUUM ANALYZE made all the difference. Is this possible (the latter, +> > we know the former is possible...)? +> +> If your FSM parameters in postgresql.conf are too small, then plain +> vacuums might have failed to keep up with the available free space, +> leading to a situation where vacuum full is essential. Did you happen +> to notice whether the vacuum full shrunk the database's disk footprint +> noticeably? +> +> regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 21:34:02 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from neo.magick.org (bowerslc-2.student.rose-hulman.edu + [137.112.146.57]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A247475461 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:34:00 -0500 (EST) +Received: from neo.magick.org (logan@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by neo.magick.org (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h2I2f8hn022359; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:41:08 -0500 +Received: from localhost (logan@localhost) + by neo.magick.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) with ESMTP id h2I2f8Nl022356; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:41:08 -0500 +X-Authentication-Warning: neo.magick.org: logan owned process doing -bs +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:41:07 -0500 (EST) +From: Logan Bowers +X-X-Sender: logan@neo.magick.org +To: Tom Lane +Cc: Neil Conway , sean@chittenden.org, + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-Reply-To: <495.1047882860@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Message-ID: +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> + + <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> + <495.1047882860@sss.pgh.pa.us> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; + BOUNDARY="1888041362-380975398-1047955267=:8636" +X-Archive-Number: 200303/130 +X-Sequence-Number: 1428 + + This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, + while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. + Send mail to mime@docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. + +--1888041362-380975398-1047955267=:8636 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII + +All right, I performed a VACUUM FULL last night and after about 3 hours I +tried running a select count(*) FROM tblwordidx and that did help things +considerably (it runs in ~20 seconds instead of 1-2 minutes). Not as good +as originally, but close. + +But, here's the breakdown of the db: + +I'm using the database as a keyword based file search engine (not the most +efficient method, I know, but it works well for my purposes). The biggest +and most relevant tables are a table of files and of words. The basic +operation that each file has a set of keywords associated with it, I do a +whole word search on tblwordidx and join with tblfiles (I know, the naming +scheme sucks, sorry!). + +Three times a day I scan the network and update the database. I insert +about 180,000 rows into a temporary table and then use it to update +temporary table (tbltmp). With the aid of a few other tables, I clean up +tblFiles so that existing rows have an updated timestamp in tblseen and +files with a timestamp older than 1 day are removed. Then, I take the new +rows in tblfiles and use a perl script to add more words to tblwordidx. +After each update a do a VACUUM and VACUUM ANALYZE which usually grinds +for 10 to 15 minutes. + +I'm running this db on a celeron 450Mhz with 256MB RAM and a 60GB HDD +(7200 rpm). For the most part I have the db running "well enough." Over +time however, I find that performance degrades, the count(*) above is an +example of a command that does worse over time. It gets run once an hour +for stats collection. When I first migrated the db to v7.3.1 it would +take about 5-10 seconds (which it is close to now after a VACUUM FULL) but +after a few weeks it would take over a minute of really intense HDD +activity. Also of note is that when I first loaded the data it would +cache very well with the query taking maybe taking 15 seconds if I had +just started the db after reboot, but when it was in its "slow" state +repeating the query didn't noticably use the disk less (nor did it take +less time). + +I've attached a VACUUM VERBOSE and my conf file (which is pretty vanilla, +I haven't tweaked it since updating). If you have any suggestions on how +I can correct this situation through config changes that would be ideal +and thanks for your help, if is just a case of doing lots of VACUUM FULLs, +I can definitely see it as a performance bottleneck for postgres. +Fortunately I can afford the huge peroformance penalty of a VACUUM FULL, +but I can certainly think of apps that can't. + + +Logan Bowers + +\d tblfiles: (219,248 rows) + Column | Type | Modifiers +----------+-----------------------------+------------------------------------------- + fid | integer | not null default +nextval('fileids'::text) + hid | integer | not null + pid | integer | not null + name | character varying(256) | not null + size | bigint | not null +Indexes: temp_fid_key unique btree (fid), + filediridx btree (hid, pid, name, size, fid), + fileidx btree (name, hid, pid, fid), + fileidxfid btree (fid, name, pid) + +\d tblwordidx: (1,739,481 rows) + Table "public.tblwordidx" + Column | Type | Modifiers +--------+------------------------+----------- + fid | integer | not null + word | character varying(128) | not null + todel | boolean | +Indexes: wordidxfid btree (fid, word), + wordidxfidonly btree (fid), + wordidxw btree (word, fid) + + + +On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Tom Lane wrote: + +> "Neil Conway" writes: +> > Sean Chittenden said: +> > A "select count(*) FROM tblwordidx" initially took about 1 second to +> > return a count of 2 million but after a few months it took several +> > minutes of really hard HDD grinding. +> >> +> >> That's because there are dead entries in the index that weren't being +> >> reused or cleaned up. As I said, this has been fixed. +> +> > That's doubtful: "select count(*) FROM foo" won't use an index. +> +> To know what's going on, as opposed to guessing about it, we'd need to +> know something about the physical sizes of the table and its indexes. +> "vacuum verbose" output would be instructive... +> +> But my best theorizing-in-advance-of-the-data guess is that Logan's +> FSM settings are too small, causing free space to be leaked over time. +> If a vacuum full restores the original performance then that's probably +> the right answer. +> +> regards, tom lane +> +> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? +> +> http://archives.postgresql.org +> +--1888041362-380975398-1047955267=:8636 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; name="postgresql.conf" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64 +Content-ID: +Content-Description: +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="postgresql.conf" + +Iw0KIyBQb3N0Z3JlU1FMIGNvbmZpZ3VyYXRpb24gZmlsZQ0KIyAtLS0tLS0t +LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KIw0KIyBUaGlzIGZpbGUgY29uc2lz +dHMgb2YgbGluZXMgb2YgdGhlIGZvcm06DQojDQojICAgbmFtZSA9IHZhbHVl +DQojDQojIChUaGUgJz0nIGlzIG9wdGlvbmFsLikgV2hpdGUgc3BhY2UgbWF5 +IGJlIHVzZWQuIENvbW1lbnRzIGFyZSBpbnRyb2R1Y2VkDQojIHdpdGggJyMn +IGFueXdoZXJlIG9uIGEgbGluZS4gVGhlIGNvbXBsZXRlIGxpc3Qgb2Ygb3B0 +aW9uIG5hbWVzIGFuZA0KIyBhbGxvd2VkIHZhbHVlcyBjYW4gYmUgZm91bmQg +aW4gdGhlIFBvc3RncmVTUUwgZG9jdW1lbnRhdGlvbi4gVGhlDQojIGNvbW1l +bnRlZC1vdXQgc2V0dGluZ3Mgc2hvd24gaW4gdGhpcyBmaWxlIHJlcHJlc2Vu +dCB0aGUgZGVmYXVsdCB2YWx1ZXMuDQojDQojIEFueSBvcHRpb24gY2FuIGFs +c28gYmUgZ2l2ZW4gYXMgYSBjb21tYW5kIGxpbmUgc3dpdGNoIHRvIHRoZQ0K +IyBwb3N0bWFzdGVyLCBlLmcuICdwb3N0bWFzdGVyIC1jIGxvZ19jb25uZWN0 +aW9ucz1vbicuIFNvbWUgb3B0aW9ucw0KIyBjYW4gYmUgY2hhbmdlZCBhdCBy +dW4tdGltZSB3aXRoIHRoZSAnU0VUJyBTUUwgY29tbWFuZC4NCiMNCiMgVGhp +cyBmaWxlIGlzIHJlYWQgb24gcG9zdG1hc3RlciBzdGFydHVwIGFuZCB3aGVu +IHRoZSBwb3N0bWFzdGVyDQojIHJlY2VpdmVzIGEgU0lHSFVQLiBJZiB5b3Ug +ZWRpdCB0aGUgZmlsZSBvbiBhIHJ1bm5pbmcgc3lzdGVtLCB5b3UgaGF2ZSAN +CiMgdG8gU0lHSFVQIHRoZSBwb3N0bWFzdGVyIGZvciB0aGUgY2hhbmdlcyB0 +byB0YWtlIGVmZmVjdCwgb3IgdXNlIA0KIyAicGdfY3RsIHJlbG9hZCIuDQoN +Cg0KIz09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 +PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KDQoNCiMNCiMJQ29u +bmVjdGlvbiBQYXJhbWV0ZXJzDQojDQojdGNwaXBfc29ja2V0ID0gZmFsc2UN +CiNzc2wgPSBmYWxzZQ0KDQojbWF4X2Nvbm5lY3Rpb25zID0gMzINCiNzdXBl +cnVzZXJfcmVzZXJ2ZWRfY29ubmVjdGlvbnMgPSAyDQoNCiNwb3J0ID0gNTQz +MiANCiNob3N0bmFtZV9sb29rdXAgPSBmYWxzZQ0KI3Nob3dfc291cmNlX3Bv +cnQgPSBmYWxzZQ0KDQojdW5peF9zb2NrZXRfZGlyZWN0b3J5ID0gJycNCiN1 +bml4X3NvY2tldF9ncm91cCA9ICcnDQojdW5peF9zb2NrZXRfcGVybWlzc2lv +bnMgPSAwNzc3CSMgb2N0YWwNCg0KI3ZpcnR1YWxfaG9zdCA9ICcnDQoNCiNr +cmJfc2VydmVyX2tleWZpbGUgPSAnJw0KDQoNCiMNCiMJU2hhcmVkIE1lbW9y +eSBTaXplDQojDQpzaGFyZWRfYnVmZmVycyA9IDEwMDAgCQkjIDIqbWF4X2Nv +bm5lY3Rpb25zLCBtaW4gMTYsIHR5cGljYWxseSA4S0IgZWFjaA0KI21heF9m +c21fcmVsYXRpb25zID0gMTAwCSMgbWluIDEwLCBmc20gaXMgZnJlZSBzcGFj +ZSBtYXAsIH40MCBieXRlcw0KI21heF9mc21fcGFnZXMgPSAxMDAwMAkJIyBt +aW4gMTAwMCwgZnNtIGlzIGZyZWUgc3BhY2UgbWFwLCB+NiBieXRlcw0KI21h +eF9sb2Nrc19wZXJfdHJhbnNhY3Rpb24gPSA2NAkjIG1pbiAxMA0KI3dhbF9i +dWZmZXJzID0gOAkJIyBtaW4gNCwgdHlwaWNhbGx5IDhLQiBlYWNoDQoNCiMN +CiMJTm9uLXNoYXJlZCBNZW1vcnkgU2l6ZXMNCiMNCiNzb3J0X21lbSA9IDEw +MjQJCSMgbWluIDY0LCBzaXplIGluIEtCDQojdmFjdXVtX21lbSA9IDgxOTIJ +CSMgbWluIDEwMjQsIHNpemUgaW4gS0INCg0KDQojDQojCVdyaXRlLWFoZWFk +IGxvZyAoV0FMKQ0KIw0KI2NoZWNrcG9pbnRfc2VnbWVudHMgPSAzCSMgaW4g +bG9nZmlsZSBzZWdtZW50cywgbWluIDEsIDE2TUIgZWFjaA0KI2NoZWNrcG9p +bnRfdGltZW91dCA9IDMwMAkjIHJhbmdlIDMwLTM2MDAsIGluIHNlY29uZHMN +CiMNCiNjb21taXRfZGVsYXkgPSAwCQkjIHJhbmdlIDAtMTAwMDAwLCBpbiBt +aWNyb3NlY29uZHMNCiNjb21taXRfc2libGluZ3MgPSA1CQkjIHJhbmdlIDEt +MTAwMA0KIw0KI2ZzeW5jID0gdHJ1ZQ0KI3dhbF9zeW5jX21ldGhvZCA9IGZz +eW5jCSMgdGhlIGRlZmF1bHQgdmFyaWVzIGFjcm9zcyBwbGF0Zm9ybXM6DQoj +CQkJCSMgZnN5bmMsIGZkYXRhc3luYywgb3Blbl9zeW5jLCBvciBvcGVuX2Rh +dGFzeW5jDQojd2FsX2RlYnVnID0gMAkJCSMgcmFuZ2UgMC0xNg0KDQoNCiMN +CiMJT3B0aW1pemVyIFBhcmFtZXRlcnMNCiMNCiNlbmFibGVfc2Vxc2NhbiA9 +IHRydWUNCiNlbmFibGVfaW5kZXhzY2FuID0gdHJ1ZQ0KI2VuYWJsZV90aWRz +Y2FuID0gdHJ1ZQ0KI2VuYWJsZV9zb3J0ID0gdHJ1ZQ0KI2VuYWJsZV9uZXN0 +bG9vcCA9IHRydWUNCiNlbmFibGVfbWVyZ2Vqb2luID0gdHJ1ZQ0KI2VuYWJs +ZV9oYXNoam9pbiA9IHRydWUNCg0KI2VmZmVjdGl2ZV9jYWNoZV9zaXplID0g +MTAwMAkjIHR5cGljYWxseSA4S0IgZWFjaA0KI3JhbmRvbV9wYWdlX2Nvc3Qg +PSA0CQkjIHVuaXRzIGFyZSBvbmUgc2VxdWVudGlhbCBwYWdlIGZldGNoIGNv +c3QNCiNjcHVfdHVwbGVfY29zdCA9IDAuMDEJCSMgKHNhbWUpDQojY3B1X2lu +ZGV4X3R1cGxlX2Nvc3QgPSAwLjAwMQkjIChzYW1lKQ0KI2NwdV9vcGVyYXRv +cl9jb3N0ID0gMC4wMDI1CSMgKHNhbWUpDQoNCiNkZWZhdWx0X3N0YXRpc3Rp +Y3NfdGFyZ2V0ID0gMTAJIyByYW5nZSAxLTEwMDANCg0KIw0KIwlHRVFPIE9w +dGltaXplciBQYXJhbWV0ZXJzDQojDQojZ2VxbyA9IHRydWUNCiNnZXFvX3Nl +bGVjdGlvbl9iaWFzID0gMi4wCSMgcmFuZ2UgMS41LTIuMA0KI2dlcW9fdGhy +ZXNob2xkID0gMTENCiNnZXFvX3Bvb2xfc2l6ZSA9IDAJCSMgZGVmYXVsdCBi +YXNlZCBvbiB0YWJsZXMgaW4gc3RhdGVtZW50LCANCgkJCQkjIHJhbmdlIDEy +OC0xMDI0DQojZ2Vxb19lZmZvcnQgPSAxDQojZ2Vxb19nZW5lcmF0aW9ucyA9 +IDANCiNnZXFvX3JhbmRvbV9zZWVkID0gLTEJCSMgYXV0by1jb21wdXRlIHNl +ZWQNCg0KDQojDQojCU1lc3NhZ2UgZGlzcGxheQ0KIw0KI3NlcnZlcl9taW5f +bWVzc2FnZXMgPSBub3RpY2UJIyBWYWx1ZXMsIGluIG9yZGVyIG9mIGRlY3Jl +YXNpbmcgZGV0YWlsOg0KCQkJCSMgICBkZWJ1ZzUsIGRlYnVnNCwgZGVidWcz +LCBkZWJ1ZzIsIGRlYnVnMSwNCgkJCQkjICAgaW5mbywgbm90aWNlLCB3YXJu +aW5nLCBlcnJvciwgbG9nLCBmYXRhbCwNCgkJCQkjICAgcGFuaWMNCiNjbGll +bnRfbWluX21lc3NhZ2VzID0gbm90aWNlCSMgVmFsdWVzLCBpbiBvcmRlciBv +ZiBkZWNyZWFzaW5nIGRldGFpbDoNCgkJCQkjICAgZGVidWc1LCBkZWJ1ZzQs +IGRlYnVnMywgZGVidWcyLCBkZWJ1ZzEsDQoJCQkJIyAgIGxvZywgaW5mbywg +bm90aWNlLCB3YXJuaW5nLCBlcnJvcg0KI3NpbGVudF9tb2RlID0gZmFsc2UN +Cg0KI2xvZ19jb25uZWN0aW9ucyA9IGZhbHNlDQojbG9nX3BpZCA9IGZhbHNl +DQojbG9nX3N0YXRlbWVudCA9IGZhbHNlDQojbG9nX2R1cmF0aW9uID0gZmFs +c2UNCiNsb2dfdGltZXN0YW1wID0gZmFsc2UNCg0KI2xvZ19taW5fZXJyb3Jf +c3RhdGVtZW50ID0gZXJyb3IJCSMgVmFsdWVzIGluIG9yZGVyIG9mIGluY3Jl +YXNpbmcgc2V2ZXJpdHk6DQoJCQkJCQkJCQkjIGRlYnVnNSwgZGVidWc0LCBk +ZWJ1ZzMsIGRlYnVnMiwgZGVidWcxLA0KCQkJCQkgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +IyBpbmZvLCBub3RpY2UsIHdhcm5pbmcsIGVycm9yDQojZGVidWdfcHJpbnRf +cGFyc2UgPSBmYWxzZQ0KI2RlYnVnX3ByaW50X3Jld3JpdHRlbiA9IGZhbHNl +DQojZGVidWdfcHJpbnRfcGxhbiA9IGZhbHNlDQojZGVidWdfcHJldHR5X3By +aW50ID0gZmFsc2UNCg0KI2V4cGxhaW5fcHJldHR5X3ByaW50ID0gdHJ1ZQ0K +DQojIHJlcXVpcmVzIFVTRV9BU1NFUlRfQ0hFQ0tJTkcNCiNkZWJ1Z19hc3Nl +cnRpb25zID0gdHJ1ZQ0KDQoNCiMNCiMJU3lzbG9nDQojDQojc3lzbG9nID0g +MAkJCSMgcmFuZ2UgMC0yDQojc3lzbG9nX2ZhY2lsaXR5ID0gJ0xPQ0FMMCcN +CiNzeXNsb2dfaWRlbnQgPSAncG9zdGdyZXMnDQoNCg0KIw0KIwlTdGF0aXN0 +aWNzDQojDQojc2hvd19wYXJzZXJfc3RhdHMgPSBmYWxzZQ0KI3Nob3dfcGxh +bm5lcl9zdGF0cyA9IGZhbHNlDQojc2hvd19leGVjdXRvcl9zdGF0cyA9IGZh +bHNlDQojc2hvd19zdGF0ZW1lbnRfc3RhdHMgPSBmYWxzZQ0KDQojIHJlcXVp +cmVzIEJUUkVFX0JVSUxEX1NUQVRTDQojc2hvd19idHJlZV9idWlsZF9zdGF0 +cyA9IGZhbHNlDQoNCg0KIw0KIwlBY2Nlc3Mgc3RhdGlzdGljcyBjb2xsZWN0 +aW9uDQojDQojc3RhdHNfc3RhcnRfY29sbGVjdG9yID0gdHJ1ZQ0KI3N0YXRz +X3Jlc2V0X29uX3NlcnZlcl9zdGFydCA9IHRydWUNCiNzdGF0c19jb21tYW5k +X3N0cmluZyA9IGZhbHNlDQojc3RhdHNfcm93X2xldmVsID0gZmFsc2UNCiNz +dGF0c19ibG9ja19sZXZlbCA9IGZhbHNlDQoNCg0KIw0KIwlMb2NrIFRyYWNp +bmcNCiMNCiN0cmFjZV9ub3RpZnkgPSBmYWxzZQ0KDQojIHJlcXVpcmVzIExP +Q0tfREVCVUcNCiN0cmFjZV9sb2NrcyA9IGZhbHNlDQojdHJhY2VfdXNlcmxv +Y2tzID0gZmFsc2UNCiN0cmFjZV9sd2xvY2tzID0gZmFsc2UNCiNkZWJ1Z19k +ZWFkbG9ja3MgPSBmYWxzZQ0KI3RyYWNlX2xvY2tfb2lkbWluID0gMTYzODQN +CiN0cmFjZV9sb2NrX3RhYmxlID0gMA0KDQoNCiMNCiMJTWlzYw0KIw0KI2F1 +dG9jb21taXQgPSB0cnVlDQojZHluYW1pY19saWJyYXJ5X3BhdGggPSAnJGxp +YmRpcicNCiNzZWFyY2hfcGF0aCA9ICckdXNlcixwdWJsaWMnDQojZGF0ZXN0 +eWxlID0gJ2lzbywgdXMnDQojdGltZXpvbmUgPSB1bmtub3duCQkjIGFjdHVh +bGx5LCBkZWZhdWx0cyB0byBUWiBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBzZXR0aW5nDQojYXVz +dHJhbGlhbl90aW1lem9uZXMgPSBmYWxzZQ0KI2NsaWVudF9lbmNvZGluZyA9 +IHNxbF9hc2NpaQkjIGFjdHVhbGx5LCBkZWZhdWx0cyB0byBkYXRhYmFzZSBl +bmNvZGluZw0KI2F1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW9uX3RpbWVvdXQgPSA2MAkjIDEtNjAw +LCBpbiBzZWNvbmRzDQojZGVhZGxvY2tfdGltZW91dCA9IDEwMDAJIyBpbiBt +aWxsaXNlY29uZHMNCiNkZWZhdWx0X3RyYW5zYWN0aW9uX2lzb2xhdGlvbiA9 +ICdyZWFkIGNvbW1pdHRlZCcNCiNtYXhfZXhwcl9kZXB0aCA9IDEwMDAwCQkj +IG1pbiAxMA0KI21heF9maWxlc19wZXJfcHJvY2VzcyA9IDEwMDAJIyBtaW4g +MjUNCiNwYXNzd29yZF9lbmNyeXB0aW9uID0gdHJ1ZQ0KI3NxbF9pbmhlcml0 +YW5jZSA9IHRydWUNCiN0cmFuc2Zvcm1fbnVsbF9lcXVhbHMgPSBmYWxzZQ0K +I3N0YXRlbWVudF90aW1lb3V0ID0gMAkJIyAwIGlzIGRpc2FibGVkLCBpbiBt +aWxsaXNlY29uZHMNCiNkYl91c2VyX25hbWVzcGFjZSA9IGZhbHNlDQogDQoN +Cg0KIw0KIwlMb2NhbGUgc2V0dGluZ3MNCiMNCiMgKGluaXRpYWxpemVkIGJ5 +IGluaXRkYiAtLSBtYXkgYmUgY2hhbmdlZCkNCkxDX01FU1NBR0VTID0gJ0Mn +DQpMQ19NT05FVEFSWSA9ICdDJw0KTENfTlVNRVJJQyA9ICdDJw0KTENfVElN +RSA9ICdDJw0K + +--1888041362-380975398-1047955267=:8636 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; name=VACVERB +Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64 +Content-ID: +Content-Description: +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=VACVERB + +SU5GTzogIC0tUmVsYXRpb24gcHVibGljLnRibHNsb2ctLQ0KSU5GTzogIFBh +Z2VzIDIxNTI6IENoYW5nZWQgMCwgRW1wdHkgMDsgVHVwIDI2Mzg5MjogVmFj +IDAsIEtlZXAgMCwgVW5Vc2VkIDAuDQoJVG90YWwgQ1BVIDAuMTRzLzAuMTN1 +IHNlYyBlbGFwc2VkIDAuNzQgc2VjLg0KSU5GTzogIC0tUmVsYXRpb24gcHVi +bGljLnRibGhvc3RzLS0NCklORk86ICBQYWdlcyA5OiBDaGFuZ2VkIDAsIEVt +cHR5IDA7IFR1cCAyMzA6IFZhYyAwLCBLZWVwIDAsIFVuVXNlZCA5MTIuDQoJ +VG90YWwgQ1BVIDAuMDBzLzAuMDB1IHNlYyBlbGFwc2VkIDAuMDAgc2VjLg0K +SU5GTzogIC0tUmVsYXRpb24gcHVibGljLnRibHBhdGhzLS0NCklORk86ICBQ +YWdlcyA5ODogQ2hhbmdlZCAwLCBFbXB0eSAwOyBUdXAgMTA0NzQ6IFZhYyAw +LCBLZWVwIDAsIFVuVXNlZCAxMDQ5Lg0KCVRvdGFsIENQVSAwLjAwcy8wLjAw +dSBzZWMgZWxhcHNlZCAwLjAyIHNlYy4NCklORk86ICAtLVJlbGF0aW9uIHB1 +YmxpYy50YmxzdGF0cy0tDQpJTkZPOiAgUGFnZXMgNjY6IENoYW5nZWQgMCwg +RW1wdHkgMDsgVHVwIDYwMDU6IFZhYyAwLCBLZWVwIDAsIFVuVXNlZCAwLg0K +CVRvdGFsIENQVSAwLjAxcy8wLjAwdSBzZWMgZWxhcHNlZCAwLjAyIHNlYy4N +CklORk86ICAtLVJlbGF0aW9uIHB1YmxpYy50Ymx1bGlzdC0tDQpJTkZPOiAg +UGFnZXMgMjk6IENoYW5nZWQgMCwgRW1wdHkgMDsgVHVwIDc5ODogVmFjIDAs +IEtlZXAgMCwgVW5Vc2VkIDQxMzIuDQoJVG90YWwgQ1BVIDAuMDBzLzAuMDB1 +IHNlYyBlbGFwc2VkIDAuMDAgc2VjLg0KSU5GTzogIC0tUmVsYXRpb24gcHVi +bGljLnRibHRtcC0tDQpJTkZPOiAgUGFnZXMgMzAwNTogQ2hhbmdlZCAwLCBF +bXB0eSAwOyBUdXAgMTU4MDk6IFZhYyAwLCBLZWVwIDAsIFVuVXNlZCAxNjk3 +NDMuDQoJVG90YWwgQ1BVIDAuMjdzLzAuMDZ1IHNlYyBlbGFwc2VkIDAuOTAg +c2VjLg0KSU5GTzogIC0tUmVsYXRpb24gcHVibGljLnRibGRsb2ctLQ0KSU5G +TzogIFBhZ2VzIDEwNzIwOiBDaGFuZ2VkIDAsIEVtcHR5IDA7IFR1cCA0Nzg5 +MDI6IFZhYyAwLCBLZWVwIDAsIFVuVXNlZCAwLg0KCVRvdGFsIENQVSAxLjA5 +cy8wLjI4dSBzZWMgZWxhcHNlZCAyLjU5IHNlYy4NCklORk86ICAtLVJlbGF0 +aW9uIHB1YmxpYy50YmxuZXdob3N0cy0tDQpJTkZPOiAgUGFnZXMgMzogQ2hh +bmdlZCAwLCBFbXB0eSAwOyBUdXAgMTg5OiBWYWMgMCwgS2VlcCAwLCBVblVz +ZWQgMC4NCglUb3RhbCBDUFUgMC4wMHMvMC4wMHUgc2VjIGVsYXBzZWQgMC4w +MCBzZWMuDQpJTkZPOiAgLS1SZWxhdGlvbiBwdWJsaWMudGJsbmV3cGF0aHMt +LQ0KSU5GTzogIFBhZ2VzIDQ6IENoYW5nZWQgMCwgRW1wdHkgMDsgVHVwIDM1 +NDogVmFjIDAsIEtlZXAgMCwgVW5Vc2VkIDAuDQoJVG90YWwgQ1BVIDAuMDBz +LzAuMDB1IHNlYyBlbGFwc2VkIDAuMDAgc2VjLg0KSU5GTzogIC0tUmVsYXRp +b24gcHVibGljLnRibG5ld2ZpbGVzLS0NCklORk86ICBQYWdlcyAxODQ0OiBD +aGFuZ2VkIDAsIEVtcHR5IDA7IFR1cCAxOTQzMjg6IFZhYyAwLCBLZWVwIDAs +IFVuVXNlZCA4Mi4NCglUb3RhbCBDUFUgMC4xOXMvMC4wOHUgc2VjIGVsYXBz +ZWQgMC4zOCBzZWMuDQpJTkZPOiAgLS1SZWxhdGlvbiBwdWJsaWMudGJsc2Vl +bi0tDQpJTkZPOiAgUGFnZXMgMTIxOTc6IENoYW5nZWQgMCwgRW1wdHkgMDsg +VHVwIDI0ODgwNzA6IFZhYyAwLCBLZWVwIDAsIFVuVXNlZCAwLg0KCVRvdGFs +IENQVSAxLjEycy8wLjU2dSBzZWMgZWxhcHNlZCAxMi41MiBzZWMuDQpJTkZP +OiAgLS1SZWxhdGlvbiBwdWJsaWMudGJsd29yZGlkeC0tDQpJTkZPOiAgUGFn +ZXMgMTAwMTM6IENoYW5nZWQgMCwgRW1wdHkgMDsgVHVwIDE3Mzk0ODE6IFZh +YyAwLCBLZWVwIDAsIFVuVXNlZCA0MDE0NC4NCglUb3RhbCBDUFUgMC45NHMv +MC40NHUgc2VjIGVsYXBzZWQgNy41MCBzZWMuDQpJTkZPOiAgLS1SZWxhdGlv +biBwdWJsaWMudGJsZmlsZXMtLQ0KSU5GTzogIFBhZ2VzIDI1Mzk6IENoYW5n +ZWQgMCwgRW1wdHkgMDsgVHVwIDIxOTI0ODogVmFjIDAsIEtlZXAgMCwgVW5V +c2VkIDMzODQ2Lg0KCVRvdGFsIENQVSAwLjI1cy8wLjA2dSBzZWMgZWxhcHNl +ZCAwLjMzIHNlYy4NCg== + +--1888041362-380975398-1047955267=:8636-- + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 21:44:03 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EE98475461 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:44:00 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2I2i3s99417 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:44:03 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101]) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h2I2hv799191; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:43:57 +0800 (WST) +Message-ID: <088d01c2ecf8$3bf742e0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +To: "Logan Bowers" , + "Tom Lane" +Cc: "Neil Conway" , , + +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> + + <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> + <495.1047882860@sss.pgh.pa.us> + +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:44:01 +0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/131 +X-Sequence-Number: 1429 + +> I'm running this db on a celeron 450Mhz with 256MB RAM and a 60GB HDD +> (7200 rpm). For the most part I have the db running "well enough." Over +> time however, I find that performance degrades, the count(*) above is an +> example of a command that does worse over time. It gets run once an hour +> for stats collection. When I first migrated the db to v7.3.1 it would +> take about 5-10 seconds (which it is close to now after a VACUUM FULL) but +> after a few weeks it would take over a minute of really intense HDD +> activity. Also of note is that when I first loaded the data it would +> cache very well with the query taking maybe taking 15 seconds if I had +> just started the db after reboot, but when it was in its "slow" state +> repeating the query didn't noticably use the disk less (nor did it take +> less time). + +To speed up your COUNT(*), how about doing this: + +Create a separate table to hold a single integer. + +Add a trigger after insert on your table to increment the counter in the +other table +Add a trigger after delete on your table to decrement the counter in the +other table. + +That way you always have an O(1) count... + +Chris + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 17 21:51:52 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E02DC475F39 + for ; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:51:50 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2I2pnub015805; + Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:51:50 -0500 (EST) +To: Logan Bowers +Cc: Neil Conway , sean@chittenden.org, + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-reply-to: +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> + + <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> + <495.1047882860@sss.pgh.pa.us> + +Comments: In-reply-to Logan Bowers + message dated "Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:41:07 -0500" +Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:51:49 -0500 +Message-ID: <15804.1047955909@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/132 +X-Sequence-Number: 1430 + +Logan Bowers writes: +> I've attached a VACUUM VERBOSE and my conf file (which is pretty vanilla, +> I haven't tweaked it since updating). + +You definitely need to increase the fsm shared memory parameters. The +default max_fsm_relations is just plain too small (try 1000) and the +default_max_fsm_pages is really only enough for perhaps a 100Mb +database. I'd try bumping it to 100,000. Note you need a postmaster +restart to make these changes take effect. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 18 09:59:59 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from irko.smoothcorp.com (unknown [208.49.241.41]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C91CE475458 + for ; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:59:56 -0500 (EST) +Received: from taurus.ifloor.com ([10.0.1.20] helo=taurus.smoothcorp.com) + by irko.smoothcorp.com with esmtp (Exim 4.12) + id 18vIZM-0005Xb-00; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 07:00:00 -0800 +Received: from localhost (chris@localhost) + by taurus.smoothcorp.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2IExuM20760; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 06:59:58 -0800 +X-Authentication-Warning: taurus.smoothcorp.com: chris owned process doing -bs +Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 06:59:56 -0800 (PST) +From: Chris Sutton +To: Logan Bowers +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-Reply-To: +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII +Content-ID: +X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, logan@datacurrent.com +X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false +X-Archive-Number: 200303/133 +X-Sequence-Number: 1431 + +On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Logan Bowers wrote: + +> Logan Bowers +> +> \d tblfiles: (219,248 rows) +> Column | Type | Modifiers +> ----------+-----------------------------+------------------------------------------- +> fid | integer | not null default +> nextval('fileids'::text) +> hid | integer | not null +> pid | integer | not null +> name | character varying(256) | not null +> size | bigint | not null +> Indexes: temp_fid_key unique btree (fid), +> filediridx btree (hid, pid, name, size, fid), +> fileidx btree (name, hid, pid, fid), +> fileidxfid btree (fid, name, pid) + +I'm no expert on indexes, but I seem to remember reading that creating +multicolumn indexes on more than 2 or 3 columns gets sort of pointless: + +http://www.us.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.3/postgres/indexes-multicolumn.html + +There is probably a ton of disk space and CPU used to keep all these multi +column indexes. Might be part of the problem. + +> \d tblwordidx: (1,739,481 rows) +> Table "public.tblwordidx" +> Column | Type | Modifiers +> --------+------------------------+----------- +> fid | integer | not null +> word | character varying(128) | not null +> todel | boolean | +> Indexes: wordidxfid btree (fid, word), +> wordidxfidonly btree (fid), +> wordidxw btree (word, fid) +> + +Another index question for the pros. When creating a multi-column index +do you need to do it both ways: + +wordidxfid btree (fid, word) +wordidxw btree (word, fid + +We have a very similar "dictonary" table here for searching. It's about +1.7 million rows, takes about 80mb of disk space. There is one multi +column index on the table which uses about 50mb of disk space. + +To find out how much disk space you are using, the hard way is: + +select relfilenode from pg_class where relname='tblwordidx'; +select relfilenode from pg_class where relname='wordidxw'; + +relfilenode is the name of the file in your data directory. + +I'm pretty sure there is an easier way to do this with a function I saw in +contrib. + +Just some thoughts. + +Chris + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 18 10:19:41 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from hotmail.com (bay1-f102.bay1.hotmail.com [65.54.245.102]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 485E3475A9E + for ; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:19:40 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 07:19:44 -0800 +Received: from 205.229.142.209 by by1fd.bay1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:19:44 GMT +X-Originating-IP: [205.229.142.209] +From: "Kendrick C. Wilson" +To: chriskl@familyhealth.com.au, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:19:44 -0600 +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed +Message-ID: +X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Mar 2003 15:19:44.0571 (UTC) + FILETIME=[CE2188B0:01C2ED61] +X-Archive-Number: 200303/134 +X-Sequence-Number: 1432 + +Clustering is good for queries that return multiple values. + +select this, that +from tableA +where this = 'whatever'; + +If there are multiple values, the location of the first record is found in +the indexFile. + +Then dataFile is scanned until this != 'whatever'; + +This will decrease disk activity, which is the bottle neck in database +performance. + +k=n^r/ck, SCJP + + +>From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +>To: "Kendrick C. Wilson" +>, +>Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org Date: Tue, 18 +>Mar 2003 09:34:36 +0800 +>MIME-Version: 1.0 +>Received: from relay2.pgsql.com ([64.49.215.143]) by +>mc6-f41.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 17 Mar +>2003 17:34:42 -0800 +>Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])by +>relay2.pgsql.com (Postfix) with ESMTPid 022ADE5BD; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 +>20:34:36 -0500 (EST) +>Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253])by +>postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A55E5475F09for +>; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 20:34:33 -0500 (EST) +>Received: (from root@localhost)by houston.familyhealth.com.au +>(8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2I1Yac95711for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, +>18 Mar 2003 09:34:36 +0800 (WST)(envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +>Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101])by +>houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h2I1YW795594;Tue, +>18 Mar 2003 09:34:32 +0800 (WST) +>X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc64AXpUCzRAW30W84h6gtv8 +>X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +>Message-ID: <07b501c2ecee$8917b8c0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +>References: +>X-Priority: 3 +>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +>X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +>Precedence: bulk +>Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org +>Return-Path: pgsql-performance-owner+M1426@postgresql.org +>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Mar 2003 01:34:42.0860 (UTC) +>FILETIME=[8CCFDEC0:01C2ECEE] +> +> +> +> > What is the structure of you table? +> > Is the data types in the table the same as in the SQL.... +> > +> > Did you create the index after the loading the table? +> > cluster the table around the most used index.... +> +>There is no point clustering a table around the most used index, unless +>access to the index is non-random. eg. you are picking up more than one +>consecutive entry from the index at a time. eg. Indexes on foreign keys +>are +>excellent for clustering. +> +>Chris +> +> +>---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +>TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? +> +>http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html + + + + +_________________________________________________________________ +MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. +http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 18 11:26:22 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2ACC476128 + for ; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 11:26:19 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2908257; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:26:12 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: Logan Bowers , + Tom Lane +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:26:10 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +Cc: Neil Conway , sean@chittenden.org, + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <495.1047882860@sss.pgh.pa.us> + +In-Reply-To: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +Message-Id: <200303180826.10200.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/135 +X-Sequence-Number: 1433 + +Logan, + +> I'm running this db on a celeron 450Mhz with 256MB RAM and a 60GB HDD +> (7200 rpm). For the most part I have the db running "well enough." Over + +Hmmm ... actually, considering your hardware, I'd say the database performance +you're getting is excellent. You're facing 3 bottlenecks: + +1) The Celeron II's lack of on-chip cache will slow down even moderately +complex queries as much as 50% over a comparably-clocked pentium or AMD chip, +in my experience. + +2) 256mb RAM is small enough that if you are running Apache on the same +machine, Apache & Postgres could be contesting for RAM during busy periods. + +3) (most noticable) You have pretty much the bare minimum of disk. For a +one-gb database, a Linux RAID array or mirror would be a lot better ... + +Of course, that's all relative. What I'm saying is, if you want your +database to "scream" you're going to have to put some money into hardware. +If you're just looking for adequate performance, then that can be had with a +little tweaking and maintainence. + +-- +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 18 21:29:45 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from 210.255.76.25 (host-A025.netspeed.dion.ne.jp [210.255.76.25]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9778C475F5F + for ; + Tue, 18 Mar 2003 21:29:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: from a231242.upc-a.chello.nl ([96.216.72.224]) by + m10.grp.snv.yahoo.com with NNFMP; Mar, 18 2003 7:18:35 PM +0400 +Received: from rly-xw01.mx.aol.com ([153.196.56.114]) by + da001d2020.lax-ca.osd.concentric.net with SMTP; + Mar, 18 2003 6:17:44 PM -0200 +From: Lodovico +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: ABOUT YOUR CREDIT......... lquwj +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" +Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 20:28:02 -0600 +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 +Message-Id: <20030319022941.9778C475F5F@postgresql.org> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/136 +X-Sequence-Number: 1434 + +

+

We can fix your credit. We are very successful at getting +bankruptcies, judgments, tax liens, foreclosures, late payments, charge-offs, +repossessions, and even student loans removed from a persons credit report. To find out more go to +http://www.netcreditlawyer.com.

+

If you no longer want to receive information from us just go to +tallrhe@cs.com.

+  + +eefellsundvsttjoqtaxnhxlg + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 19 14:53:14 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from email01.aon.at (WARSL401PIP8.highway.telekom.at [195.3.96.97]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5668F474E4F + for ; + Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:53:11 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 620460 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2003 19:53:10 -0000 +Received: from m169p021.dipool.highway.telekom.at (HELO cantor) + ([62.46.11.21]) (envelope-sender ) + by qmail1rs.highway.telekom.at (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP + for ; 19 Mar 2003 19:53:10 -0000 +From: Manfred Koizar +To: "Kendrick C. Wilson" +Cc: chriskl@familyhealth.com.au, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 20:52:21 +0100 +Message-ID: <00ih7vcuu5gf29oep2hi9sctrnui061ogh@4ax.com> +References: +In-Reply-To: +X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/137 +X-Sequence-Number: 1435 + +On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:19:44 -0600, "Kendrick C. Wilson" + wrote: +>If there are multiple values, the location of the first record is found in +>the indexFile. +> +>Then dataFile is scanned until this != 'whatever'; + +Nice, but unfortunately not true for Postgres. When you do the first +UPDATE after CLUSTER the new version of the changed row(s) are written +to the end of the dataFile (heap relation in Postgres speech). So the +*index* has to be scanned until this != 'whatever'. + +>Clustering is good for queries that return multiple [rows with the same search] values. + +Yes. With clustering you can expect that most of the tuples you want +are near to each other and you find several of them in the same page. + +Servus + Manfred + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 13:55:38 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1ED8D474E4F + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 13:55:37 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 25281 invoked by uid 0); 20 Mar 2003 18:55:15 -0000 +Received: from pD9E82E12.dip.t-dialin.net (HELO gmx.net) (217.232.46.18) + by mail.gmx.net (mp015-rz3) with SMTP; 20 Mar 2003 18:55:15 -0000 +Message-ID: <3E7A0E27.7040805@gmx.net> +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 19:53:27 +0100 +From: Torsten Schulz +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de-AT; rv:1.4a) Gecko/20030318 +X-Accept-Language: de-de, en-us +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Make PGSQL faster +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Archive-Number: 200303/138 +X-Sequence-Number: 1436 + +Hi, + +we have a great Database with Postgres. It is a Community. + +We have a Dual-CPU-System with 1 GB RAM + +It works on Apache with PHP. But we hadn't enough Performance. + +What's the optimized configuration with many Database-actions on great +tables in a lapp-system? + +Greetings +Torsten + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 15:45:26 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from hotmail.com (bay1-f34.bay1.hotmail.com [65.54.245.34]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 672DB47634D + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 15:45:24 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:45:24 -0800 +Received: from 205.229.142.209 by by1fd.bay1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 20:45:24 GMT +X-Originating-IP: [205.229.142.209] +X-Originating-Email: [kendrick_wilson@hotmail.com] +From: "Kendrick C. Wilson" +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Page Size in Future Releases +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 14:45:24 -0600 +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed +Message-ID: +X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Mar 2003 20:45:24.0951 (UTC) + FILETIME=[A1EE6670:01C2EF21] +X-Archive-Number: 200303/139 +X-Sequence-Number: 1437 + +Will a increase in the size of a data page increase performance of a +database with large records? + +I have records about 881 byte + 40 byte (header) = 921. + +8k page size / 921 bytes per record is ONLY 8 records........... + +Comments are welcome......... + +k=n^r/ck, SCJP + +_________________________________________________________________ +MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* +http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 16:16:02 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from smtp.noos.fr (nan-smtp-06.noos.net [212.198.2.75]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D782F474E4F + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 16:15:59 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 55290743 invoked by uid 0); 20 Mar 2003 21:16:00 -0000 +Received: from unknown (HELO camille) ([195.132.173.79]) + (envelope-sender ) + by 212.198.2.75 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP + for ; 20 Mar 2003 21:16:00 -0000 +Message-ID: <00c301c2ef27$65d954a0$4fad84c3@camille> +From: "Guillaume Houssay" +To: +Subject: just to get some opinion on my configuration +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 22:26:40 +0100 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00C0_01C2EF2F.C775E950" +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-Archive-Number: 200303/140 +X-Sequence-Number: 1438 + +This is a multi-part message in MIME format. + +------=_NextPart_000_00C0_01C2EF2F.C775E950 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +I am setting up a project using APache, PHP and Postgresql. +This application will be used by about 30 users. + +The database is about this type : + +between 12GB and 15GB +4 tables will have 1M rows and 1000 columns with 90% of INT2 and the rest o= +f float (20% of all the data will be 0) +the orther tables are less than 10 000 rows + +Most of the queries will be SELECT being not very complicated (I think at t= +his time) + +I have 1 question regardind the hardware configuration : + +DELL=20 +bi-processor 2.8GHz +4GB RAM +76GB HD using Raid 5 +Linux version to be defined (Redhat ?) + +Do you think this configuration is enough to have good performance after se= +tting up properly the database ? + +Do you thing the big tables should be splitted in order to have less column= +s. This could mean that I would have some queries with JOIN ? + +Thank you for your help ! + +------=_NextPart_000_00C0_01C2EF2F.C775E950 +Content-Type: text/html; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + + + + + + + + +

I am setting up a project using APache, PH= +P and=20 +Postgresql.
+
This application will be used by about 30= +=20 +users.
+
 
+
The database is about this type : +
 
+
between 12GB and 15GB
+
4 tables will have 1M rows and 1000 column= +s with=20 +90% of INT2 and the rest of float (20% of all the data will be 0) +
the orther tables are less than 10 000=20 +rows
+
 
+
Most of the queries will be SELECT being n= +ot very=20 +complicated (I think at this time)
+
 
+
I have 1 question regardind the hardware= +=20 +configuration :
+
 
+
DELL
+
bi-processor 2.8GHz
+
4GB RAM
+
76GB HD using Raid 5
+
Linux version to be defined (Redhat ?)
+
 
+
Do you think this configuration is enough = +to have=20 +good performance after setting up properly the database ?
+
 
+
Do you thing the big tables should be spli= +tted in=20 +order to have less columns. This could mean that I would have some queries = +with=20 +JOIN ?
+
 
+
Thank you for your help !
+
 
+ +------=_NextPart_000_00C0_01C2EF2F.C775E950-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 16:41:26 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mail01.stbernard.com (mail01.stbernard.com [64.154.93.162]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP + id C79A7475D91; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 16:41:24 -0500 (EST) +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 +content-class: urn:content-classes:message +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Subject: Help with LIKE +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 13:41:25 -0800 +Message-ID: +X-MS-Has-Attach: +X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: +Thread-Topic: Help with LIKE +Thread-Index: AcLvKXUTE3v5RmpbSjiupBS4CDj5pw== +From: "David Olbersen" +To: +Cc: +X-Archive-Number: 200303/141 +X-Sequence-Number: 1439 + +I have a table with 8,628,633 rows that I'd LIKE to search (ha ha). + +I have a very simple query: + SELECT * FROM tableA WHERE column1 LIKE '%something%'; + +tableA.column1 has an index on it and the database has been vacuumed recent= +ly. My problem is with the output of EXPLAIN: + ++----------------------------------------------------------------+ +| QUERY PLAN | ++----------------------------------------------------------------+ +| Seq Scan on tableA (cost=3D0.00..212651.61 rows=3D13802 width=3D46) | +| Filter: (column1 ~~ '%something%'::text) | ++----------------------------------------------------------------+ + +I don't like that cost (2,12,651) at all! Is there anyway I can optimize th= +is query? Make a different kind of index (it's currently btree)? Use substr= + or indexof or something instead of LIKE? + +Thoughts? + +-------------------------- +David Olbersen=20 +iGuard Engineer +11415 West Bernardo Court=20 +San Diego, CA 92127=20 +1-858-676-2277 x2152 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 16:55:38 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 24DB8476355; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 16:55:37 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO temoku) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2912779; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 13:55:27 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: "David Olbersen" , + +Subject: Re: Help with LIKE +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 13:55:32 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +Cc: +References: +In-Reply-To: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303201355.32718.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/142 +X-Sequence-Number: 1440 + +David, + +> I have a table with 8,628,633 rows that I'd LIKE to search (ha ha). +>=20 +> I have a very simple query: +> SELECT * FROM tableA WHERE column1 LIKE '%something%'; + +That's what's called an "unanchored text search". That kind of query cann= +ot=20 +be indexed using a regular index. + +What you need is called "Full Text Indexing" or "Full Text Search". Check= +=20 +out two resources: + +1) contrib/tsearch in your PostgreSQL source code; +2) OpenFTS (www.openfts.org). + +--=20 +-Josh Berkus + Aglio Database Solutions + San Francisco + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 18:01:18 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from Mail.CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE (Mail.CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE + [129.69.16.17]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 125A0475C15 + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 18:01:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: from rusfw by Mail.CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE with local (Exim 4.10) + id 18w92E-0000mB-00 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 00:01:18 +0100 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> + + <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> + <495.1047882860@sss.pgh.pa.us> + + <15804.1047955909@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Florian Weimer +Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 00:01:18 +0100 +In-Reply-To: <15804.1047955909@sss.pgh.pa.us> (Tom Lane's message of "Mon, + 17 Mar 2003 21:51:49 -0500") +Message-ID: <87fzphk5hd.fsf@Login.CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE> +User-Agent: Gnus/5.090008 (Oort Gnus v0.08) Emacs/21.2 (i386-pc-linux-gnu) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Archive-Number: 200303/143 +X-Sequence-Number: 1441 + +Tom Lane writes: + +> You definitely need to increase the fsm shared memory parameters. The +> default max_fsm_relations is just plain too small (try 1000) and the +> default_max_fsm_pages is really only enough for perhaps a 100Mb +> database. I'd try bumping it to 100,000. Note you need a postmaster +> restart to make these changes take effect. + +Hmm, are there any guidelines for choosing these values? + +We have a database with a table into which we insert about 4,000,000 +rows each day, and delete another 4,000,000 rows. The total row count +is around 40 million, I guess, and the rows are about 150 bytes long. +(VACUUM FULL is running at the moment, so I can't check.) + +The database is used as a research tool, and we run moderately complex +ad-hoc queries on it. As a consequence, I don't see much room for +optimization. + +One of the columns is time-based and indexed, so we suffer from the +creeping index syndrome. A nightly index rebuild followed by a VACUUM +ANALYZE isn't a problem (it takes less than six ours), but this +doesn't seem to be enough (we seem to lose disk space nevertheless). + +I can't afford a regular VACUUM FULL because it takes down the +database for over ten hours, and this starts to cut into the working +hours no matter when it starts. + +Can you suggest some tweaks to the FSM values so that we can avoid the +full VACUUM? The database runs 7.3.2 and resides on a 4-way Xeon box +with 4 GB of RAM and a severely underpowered disk subsystem (Linux +software RAID1 on two 10k 36 GB SCSI drives -- don't ask, this +database application is nothing but an accident which happened after +purchase of the box). + +-- +Florian Weimer Weimer@CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE +University of Stuttgart http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/ +RUS-CERT fax +49-711-685-5898 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 18:19:13 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mail01.stbernard.com (mail01.stbernard.com [64.154.93.162]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 28085476311; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 18:19:11 -0500 (EST) +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 +content-class: urn:content-classes:message +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Subject: Re: Help with LIKE +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 15:19:13 -0800 +Message-ID: +X-MS-Has-Attach: +X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: +Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] Help with LIKE +Thread-Index: AcLvK3h1qKUNPIpDSU+ZH9+33WRiaAAC1hSA +From: "David Olbersen" +To: +Cc: +X-Archive-Number: 200303/144 +X-Sequence-Number: 1442 + +Josh, + +> That's what's called an "unanchored text search". That kind=20 +> of query cannot be indexed using a regular index. + +Duh, should have tried the anchors to get what I wanted... + +> What you need is called "Full Text Indexing" or "Full Text=20 +> Search". Check=20 +> out two resources: + +This isn't actually what I was looking for, the anchor works better (only 5= +.87 now!) + +Thanks for the reminder! + +-------------------------- +David Olbersen=20 +iGuard Engineer +11415 West Bernardo Court=20 +San Diego, CA 92127=20 +1-858-676-2277 x2152 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 18:35:38 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from mail01.stbernard.com (mail01.stbernard.com [64.154.93.162]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 772F1475AFF + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 18:35:36 -0500 (EST) +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 +content-class: urn:content-classes:message +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Subject: Re: Help with LIKE +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 15:35:39 -0800 +Message-ID: +X-MS-Has-Attach: +X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: +Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] Help with LIKE +Thread-Index: AcLvK3h1qKUNPIpDSU+ZH9+33WRiaAAC1hSAAAB9JwA= +From: "David Olbersen" +To: +X-Archive-Number: 200303/145 +X-Sequence-Number: 1443 + +My mistake, things don't get much better. + +I'm selecting URLs out of a database like this: + + SELECT * FROM table WHERE url ~ '^http://.*something.*$'; + +This still uses a sequential scan but cuts the time down to 76,351 from 212= +,651 using + + WHERE url LIKE '%something%'; + +The full text indexing doesn't look quite right as there are no spaces in t= +his data. + +Also, using something like: +=20=20 + WHERE position( 'something', url ) > 0 + +is a bit worse, giving 84,259. + +-------------------------- +David Olbersen=20 +iGuard Engineer +11415 West Bernardo Court=20 +San Diego, CA 92127=20 +1-858-676-2277 x2152 + + +> -----Original Message----- +> From: David Olbersen=20 +> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 3:19 PM +> To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org +> Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Help with LIKE +>=20 +>=20 +> Josh, +>=20 +> > That's what's called an "unanchored text search". That kind=20 +> > of query cannot be indexed using a regular index. +>=20 +> Duh, should have tried the anchors to get what I wanted... +>=20 +> > What you need is called "Full Text Indexing" or "Full Text=20 +> > Search". Check=20 +> > out two resources: +>=20 +> This isn't actually what I was looking for, the anchor works=20 +> better (only 5.87 now!) +>=20 +> Thanks for the reminder! +>=20 +> -------------------------- +> David Olbersen=20 +> iGuard Engineer +> 11415 West Bernardo Court=20 +> San Diego, CA 92127=20 +> 1-858-676-2277 x2152 +>=20 +> ---------------------------(end of=20 +> broadcast)--------------------------- +> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to=20 +> majordomo@postgresql.org +>=20 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 20:27:30 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2192F475D91 + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 20:27:29 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO temoku) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2913050; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 17:27:15 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: "David Olbersen" , + +Subject: Re: Help with LIKE +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 17:27:21 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +References: +In-Reply-To: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303201727.21401.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/146 +X-Sequence-Number: 1444 + +David, + +> My mistake, things don't get much better. +>=20 +> I'm selecting URLs out of a database like this: +>=20 +> SELECT * FROM table WHERE url ~ '^http://.*something.*$'; + +That search still requires a seq scan, since it has "gaps" in the seqence o= +f=20 +characters. That is, + +url ~ '^http://www.something.*' could use an index, but your search above= +=20 +cannot. + +You may be right that the standard OpenFTS indexing won't help you in this= +=20 +case, since you're really searching for fragments of a continuous text=20 +string. + +One thing I might suggest is that you look for ways that you might be able = +to=20 +break out the text you're searching for with a function. For example, if y= +ou=20 +were searching strictly on the domain SLD name, then you could create an=20 +"immutable" function called if_split_sld(TEXT) and index on that. + +If you are really searching for "floating" text within the string, I believ= +e=20 +that there are some options in tseach to help you, but they may not end up= +=20 +improving performance much. + +--=20 +-Josh Berkus + Aglio Database Solutions + San Francisco + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 21:06:21 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 965A9475AFF + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 21:06:19 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2L26Lub008916; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 21:06:21 -0500 (EST) +To: josh@agliodbs.com +Cc: "David Olbersen" , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Help with LIKE +In-reply-to: <200303201727.21401.josh@agliodbs.com> +References: + <200303201727.21401.josh@agliodbs.com> +Comments: In-reply-to Josh Berkus + message dated "Thu, 20 Mar 2003 17:27:21 -0800" +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 21:06:21 -0500 +Message-ID: <8915.1048212381@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/147 +X-Sequence-Number: 1445 + +Josh Berkus writes: +>> SELECT * FROM table WHERE url ~ '^http://.*something.*$'; + +> That search still requires a seq scan, since it has "gaps" in the seqence of +> characters. That is, + +> url ~ '^http://www.something.*' could use an index, but your search above +> cannot. + +Actually, it *can* use an index ... but the index condition will only +use the characters before the ".*", ie, "http://". Which is just about +useless if you're searching a column of URLs :-( + +I agree that tsearch or OpenFTS are the tools to be looking at. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 22:39:07 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from www.pspl.co.in (www.pspl.co.in [202.54.11.65]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCDD9475AFF + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 22:39:02 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by www.pspl.co.in (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2L3d6D09311 + for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:09:06 +0530 +Received: from daithan.intranet.pspl.co.in (daithan.intranet.pspl.co.in + [192.168.7.161]) + by www.pspl.co.in (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h2L3d6m09306 + for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:09:06 +0530 +From: "Shridhar Daithankar" + +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Page Size in Future Releases +Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:09:56 +0530 +User-Agent: KMail/1.5 +References: +In-Reply-To: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Disposition: inline +Message-Id: <200303210909.56451.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/148 +X-Sequence-Number: 1446 + +On Friday 21 Mar 2003 2:15 am, Kendrick C. Wilson wrote: +> Will a increase in the size of a data page increase performance of a +> database with large records? +> +> I have records about 881 byte + 40 byte (header) = 921. +> +> 8k page size / 921 bytes per record is ONLY 8 records........... + +You can tweak it yourself at compile time in some header file and that should +work but that is a point of diminising results as far as hackers are +concerned. + +One reason I know where it would help is getting postgresql to use tons of +shaerd memory. Right now postgresql can not use much beyond 250MB(??) because +number of shared buffer are int or something. So if you know your reconrds +are large, are often manipulated and your OS is not so good at file caching, +then increasing page size might help. + +Given how good unices are in general in terms of file and memory handling, I +woudl say you should not do it unless your average record size is greater +than 8K, something like a large genome sequence or so. + +YMMV.. + + Shridhar + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 22:48:05 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from www.pspl.co.in (www.pspl.co.in [202.54.11.65]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648BF475AFF + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 22:48:02 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by www.pspl.co.in (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2L3m5O10034 + for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:18:05 +0530 +Received: from daithan.intranet.pspl.co.in (daithan.intranet.pspl.co.in + [192.168.7.161]) + by www.pspl.co.in (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h2L3m4m10024; + Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:18:05 +0530 +From: "Shridhar Daithankar" + +To: Florian Weimer +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:18:54 +0530 +User-Agent: KMail/1.5 +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <15804.1047955909@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <87fzphk5hd.fsf@Login.CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE> +In-Reply-To: <87fzphk5hd.fsf@Login.CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE> +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Disposition: inline +Message-Id: <200303210918.54380.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/149 +X-Sequence-Number: 1447 + +On Friday 21 Mar 2003 4:31 am, Florian Weimer wrote: +> Tom Lane writes: +> > You definitely need to increase the fsm shared memory parameters. The +> > default max_fsm_relations is just plain too small (try 1000) and the +> > default_max_fsm_pages is really only enough for perhaps a 100Mb +> > database. I'd try bumping it to 100,000. Note you need a postmaster +> > restart to make these changes take effect. +> +> Hmm, are there any guidelines for choosing these values? +> +> We have a database with a table into which we insert about 4,000,000 +> rows each day, and delete another 4,000,000 rows. The total row count +> is around 40 million, I guess, and the rows are about 150 bytes long. +> (VACUUM FULL is running at the moment, so I can't check.) + +I suggest you split your tables into exactly similar tables using inheritance. +Your queries won't be affected as you can make them on parent table and get +same result. + +But as far as vacuuming goes, you can probably dump a child table entirely and +recreate it as a fast alternative to vacuum. + +Only catch is, I don't know if inherited tables would use their respective +indxes other wise your queries might be slow as anything. + +> One of the columns is time-based and indexed, so we suffer from the +> creeping index syndrome. A nightly index rebuild followed by a VACUUM +> ANALYZE isn't a problem (it takes less than six ours), but this +> doesn't seem to be enough (we seem to lose disk space nevertheless). + +I am sure a select * from table into another table; drop table; renamre temp +table kind of hack would be faster than vacuuming in this case.. + +This is just a suggestion. Good if this works for you.. + + Shridhar + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 22:51:34 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3E3B475AFF + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 22:51:31 -0500 (EST) +Received: (from root@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h2L3pZN23698 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; + Fri, 21 Mar 2003 11:51:35 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Received: from mariner (mariner.internal [192.168.0.101]) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.9.3) with SMTP id h2L3pV723599; + Fri, 21 Mar 2003 11:51:31 +0800 (WST) +Message-ID: <08ac01c2ef5d$3487fec0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal> +From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" +To: , +References: + <200303210909.56451.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> +Subject: Re: Page Size in Future Releases +Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 11:51:51 +0800 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 0.1.5c - (http://www.inflex.co.za/) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/150 +X-Sequence-Number: 1448 + + +> > I have records about 881 byte + 40 byte (header) = 921. +> > +> > 8k page size / 921 bytes per record is ONLY 8 records........... +> +> You can tweak it yourself at compile time in some header file and that +should +> work but that is a point of diminising results as far as hackers are +> concerned. + +As far as I'm aware the 8k page size has nothing to do with speed and +everything to do with atomic writes. You can't be guaranteed that the O/S +and hard drive controller will write anything more than 8K in an atomic +block... + +Chris + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 20 23:04:10 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40EBB475CBC + for ; + Thu, 20 Mar 2003 23:04:09 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2913230; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 20:04:02 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: "Shridhar Daithankar" + , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Page Size in Future Releases +Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 20:03:41 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +References: + <200303210909.56451.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> +In-Reply-To: <200303210909.56451.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit +Message-Id: <200303202003.41383.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Archive-Number: 200303/151 +X-Sequence-Number: 1449 + +Shridar, + +> One reason I know where it would help is getting postgresql to use tons of +> shaerd memory. Right now postgresql can not use much beyond 250MB(??) +> because number of shared buffer are int or something. So if you know your +> reconrds are large, are often manipulated and your OS is not so good at +> file caching, then increasing page size might help. + +Um, two fallacies: +1) You can allocate as much shared buffer ram as you want. The maxium I've +tested is 300mb, personally, but I know of no hard limit. + +2) However, allocating more shared buffer ram ... in fact anything beyond +about 40mb ... has never been shown by anyone on this list to be helpful for +any size database, and sometimes the contrary. + + +-- +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 21 01:18:39 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B672A47637E + for ; + Fri, 21 Mar 2003 01:18:34 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2L6IWub010491; + Fri, 21 Mar 2003 01:18:33 -0500 (EST) +To: Florian Weimer +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org +In-reply-to: <87fzphk5hd.fsf@Login.CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE> +References: <20030316060125.GD19570@vt.edu> <3E741B93.1090203@joeconway.com> + <20030316075206.GE19570@vt.edu> + + <20030317061011.GH23355@perrin.int.nxad.com> + <33137.130.15.224.150.1047881939.squirrel@mailbox.samurai.com> + <495.1047882860@sss.pgh.pa.us> + + <15804.1047955909@sss.pgh.pa.us> + <87fzphk5hd.fsf@Login.CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE> +Comments: In-reply-to Florian Weimer + message dated "Fri, 21 Mar 2003 00:01:18 +0100" +Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 01:18:32 -0500 +Message-ID: <10490.1048227512@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/152 +X-Sequence-Number: 1450 + +Florian Weimer writes: +> Hmm, are there any guidelines for choosing these values? + +> We have a database with a table into which we insert about 4,000,000 +> rows each day, and delete another 4,000,000 rows. The total row count +> is around 40 million, I guess, and the rows are about 150 bytes long. + +If you are replacing 10% of the rows in the table every day, then it's +a pretty good bet that every single page of the table contains free +space. Accordingly, you'd better set max_fsm_pages large enough to +have a FSM slot for every page of the table. (1 page = 8Kb normally) + +You could possibly get away with a smaller FSM if you do (non-FULL) +vacuums more often than once a day. Some people find they can run +background vacuums without hurting performance too much, some don't +--- I suspect it depends on how much spare disk bandwidth you have. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 21 21:10:11 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AF5E47636F + for ; + Fri, 21 Mar 2003 21:10:09 -0500 (EST) +Received: from kant.catalyst.net.nz (203-96-145-95.adsl.paradise.net.nz + [203.96.145.95]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26B447636C + for ; + Fri, 21 Mar 2003 21:10:08 -0500 (EST) +Received: from 127.0.0.1 (ident=unknown) by kant.catalyst.net.nz with + esmtp (masqmail 0.2.19) id 18wSmJ-73c-00; Sat, 22 Mar 2003 08:06:11 + +1200 +Subject: Re: Make PGSQL faster +From: Andrew McMillan +To: Torsten Schulz +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +In-Reply-To: <3E7A0E27.7040805@gmx.net> +References: <3E7A0E27.7040805@gmx.net> +Content-Type: text/plain +Organization: +Message-Id: <1048277170.32501.2459.camel@kant.mcmillan.net.nz> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 22 Mar 2003 08:06:11 +1200 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-31.9 required=5.0 + tests=DATE_IN_PAST_06_12,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO, + QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, + USER_AGENT_XIMIAN autolearn=ham version=2.50-cvs +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50-cvs (1.172-2003-02-14-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/154 +X-Sequence-Number: 1452 + +On Fri, 2003-03-21 at 06:53, Torsten Schulz wrote: +> Hi, +> +> we have a great Database with Postgres. It is a Community. +> +> We have a Dual-CPU-System with 1 GB RAM +> +> It works on Apache with PHP. But we hadn't enough Performance. +> +> What's the optimized configuration with many Database-actions on great +> tables in a lapp-system? + +It is hard to say without more information, but it may be that you +should increase the buffers used by postgres - 1000 is a good starting +point. + +My experience suggests that performance is not a 'general' thing +applying to the whole application but in most cases the bad performance +will be one query out of a hundred. + +In my applications I wrap my calls to PostgreSQL so I can log the amount +of time each query took (in microseconds). Then when I have a query +that takes 10mS, I know I can ignore it and concentrate on the one that +takes 20000mS instead. + +Regards, + Andrew. +-- +--------------------------------------------------------------------- +Andrew @ Catalyst .Net.NZ Ltd, PO Box 11-053, Manners St, Wellington +WEB: http://catalyst.net.nz/ PHYS: Level 2, 150-154 Willis St +DDI: +64(4)916-7201 MOB: +64(21)635-694 OFFICE: +64(4)499-2267 + Survey for nothing with http://survey.net.nz/ +--------------------------------------------------------------------- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 21 19:15:24 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66995475AD4 + for ; + Fri, 21 Mar 2003 19:15:22 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2M0FNub016705; + Fri, 21 Mar 2003 19:15:23 -0500 (EST) +To: "Kendrick C. Wilson" +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Page Size in Future Releases +In-reply-to: +References: +Comments: In-reply-to "Kendrick C. Wilson" + message dated "Thu, 20 Mar 2003 14:45:24 -0600" +Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 19:15:23 -0500 +Message-ID: <16704.1048292123@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Archive-Number: 200303/153 +X-Sequence-Number: 1451 + +"Kendrick C. Wilson" writes: +> Will a increase in the size of a data page increase performance of a +> database with large records? + +Probably not; in fact the increased WAL overhead could make it a net +loss. But feel free to try changing BLCKSZ to see how it works for you. + + regards, tom lane + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 23 03:45:28 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 147FB475D3B + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 03:45:26 -0500 (EST) +Received: from relay.icomedias.com (relay.icomedias.com [62.99.232.66]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DC21474E42 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 03:45:25 -0500 (EST) +Received: from loki.icomedias.com ([10.192.17.128]) + by relay.icomedias.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2N8jOsl010778 + for ; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 09:45:24 +0100 +From: Mario Weilguni +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Page Size in Future Releases +Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 09:46:41 +0100 +User-Agent: KMail/1.5 +References: + <16704.1048292123@sss.pgh.pa.us> +In-Reply-To: <16704.1048292123@sss.pgh.pa.us> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Content-Disposition: inline +Message-Id: <200303230946.41441.mweilguni@sime.com> +avpresult: 0, ok, ok +X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.16 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-19.6 required=5.0 + tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, + USER_AGENT autolearn=ham version=2.50-cvs +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50-cvs (1.172-2003-02-14-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/155 +X-Sequence-Number: 1453 + +Am Samstag, 22. M=E4rz 2003 01:15 schrieb Tom Lane: +> "Kendrick C. Wilson" writes: +> > Will a increase in the size of a data page increase performance of a +> > database with large records? +> +> Probably not; in fact the increased WAL overhead could make it a net +> loss. But feel free to try changing BLCKSZ to see how it works for you. + +I've several database with 32KB and 8KB, and though the results are not rea= +lly comparable due to slight different hardware, I've the feeling that 8KB = +buffers work best in most cases. The only difference I noticed are large ob= +jects which seem to work slightly better with larger sizes. + +Regards, + Mario Weilguni + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 23 12:38:54 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F274474E53 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 12:38:53 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mxzilla1.xs4all.nl (mxzilla1.xs4all.nl [194.109.6.54]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62C7E474E44 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 12:38:52 -0500 (EST) +Received: from webmail3.xs4all.nl (webmail2.xs4all.nl [194.109.127.35] (may be + forged)) + by mxzilla1.xs4all.nl (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h2NHcuh2044173 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:38:57 +0100 (CET) +Received: (from nobody@localhost) + by webmail3.xs4all.nl (8.11.6/8.11.1) id h2NHcwn62885; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:38:58 +0100 (CET) + (envelope-from bsamwel@xs4all.nl) +X-Authentication-Warning: webmail3.xs4all.nl: nobody set sender to + bsamwel@xs4all.nl using -f +Received: from 194.109.187.67 (SquirrelMail authenticated user bsamwel) + by webmail.xs4all.nl with HTTP; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:38:58 +0100 (CET) +Message-ID: <21139.194.109.187.67.1048441138.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> +Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:38:58 +0100 (CET) +Subject: Slow update of indexed column with many nulls +From: bsamwel@xs4all.nl +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Reply-To: bsamwel@xs4all.nl +X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.3.2 [CVS-DEVEL]) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME,X_AUTH_WARNING + version=2.50-cvs +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50-cvs (1.172-2003-02-14-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/156 +X-Sequence-Number: 1454 + +Hi everybody, + +I'm having a performance problem, PostgreSQL (7.3.2) is skipping some +optimisation options that it shouldn't IMO. It can be fully reproduced as +follows: + +create table foo( +bar char(100), +baz integer +); + +Now create a file with 1.2 million empty lines and do a \copy foo (bar) +from 'thatfile'. This should fill the table with 1.2 million rows. Now do: + +insert into foo (baz) values (28); +create index foo_idx on foo(baz); +vacuum full analyze foo; + +Now, we would expect that PostgreSQL is fully aware that there are not +many rows in foo that have "baz is not null". However: + +bsamwel=> explain update foo set baz=null where baz is not null; + QUERY PLAN +--------------------------------------------------------------- + Seq Scan on foo (cost=0.00..34470.09 rows=1286146 width=110) + Filter: (baz IS NOT NULL) +(2 rows) + + +So, it thinks it must do a sequential scan on foo, even though it should +know by now that foo.baz is really mostly null. Even if I disable +sequential scan it still chooses this option! Why doesn't it use the +index? It doesn't use the index either when I try to select all rows that +are not null. + +Just for completeness' sake I'll give you the explain analyze: + +bsamwel=> explain analyze update foo set baz=null where baz is not null; + QUERY PLAN +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + Seq Scan on foo (cost=0.00..34470.09 rows=1286146 width=110) (actual +time=19678.82..19678.84 rows=1 loops=1) + Filter: (baz IS NOT NULL) + Total runtime: 19750.21 msec +(3 rows) + +Do you guys have any idea? + +Regards, +Bart + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 23 12:58:20 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5482D474E53 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 12:58:18 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mxzilla3.xs4all.nl (mxzilla3.xs4all.nl [194.109.6.49]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9102F474E44 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 12:58:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: from webmail3.xs4all.nl (webmail2.xs4all.nl [194.109.127.35] (may be + forged)) + by mxzilla3.xs4all.nl (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h2NHwMwc047365 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:58:22 +0100 (CET) +Received: (from nobody@localhost) + by webmail3.xs4all.nl (8.11.6/8.11.1) id h2NHwOE64489; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:58:24 +0100 (CET) + (envelope-from bsamwel@xs4all.nl) +X-Authentication-Warning: webmail3.xs4all.nl: nobody set sender to + bsamwel@xs4all.nl using -f +Received: from 194.109.187.67 (SquirrelMail authenticated user bsamwel) + by webmail.xs4all.nl with HTTP; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:58:24 +0100 (CET) +Message-ID: <20505.194.109.187.67.1048442304.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> +Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:58:24 +0100 (CET) +Subject: Adding a foreign key constraint is extremely slow +From: bsamwel@xs4all.nl +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Reply-To: bsamwel@xs4all.nl +X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.3.2 [CVS-DEVEL]) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME,X_AUTH_WARNING + version=2.50-cvs +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50-cvs (1.172-2003-02-14-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/157 +X-Sequence-Number: 1455 + +Hi guys, + +I'm having another performance problem as well. I have two tables called +"wwwlog" (about 100 bytes per row, 1.2 million records) and table called +"triples" (about 20 bytes per row, 0.9 million records). Triples contains +an integer foreign key to wwwlog, but it was not marked as a foreign key +at the point of table creation. Now, when I do: + +alter table triples add foreign key(id1) references wwwlog(id); + +PostgreSQL starts doing heavy work for at least one and a half hour, and I +broke it off at that. It is not possible to "explain" a statement like +this! Probably what it does is that it will check the foreign key +constraint for every field in the table. This will make it completely +impossible to load my data, because: + +(1) I cannot set the foreign key constraints BEFORE loading the 0.9 +million records, because that would cause the checks to take place during +loading. +(2) I cannot set the foreign key constraints AFTER loading the 0.9 million +records because I've got no clue at all how long this operation is going +to take. +(3) Table "triples" contains two more foreign keys to the same wwwlog key. +This means I've got to do the same thing two more times after the first +one is finished. + +I find this behaviour very annoying, because it is possible to optimize a +check like this very well, for instance by creating a temporary data set +containing the union of all foreign keys and all primary keys of the +original table, augmented with an extra field "pri" which is 1 if the +record comes from the primary keys and 0 otherwise. Say this data is +contained in a temporary table called "t" with columns "key" and "pri" for +the data. One would then be able to do the check like this: + +NOT EXISTS( + SELECT key,sum(pri) + FROM t + GROUP BY key + HAVING sum(pri) = 0 +); + +This means that there must not exist a group of "key" values that does not +have a primary key somewhere in the set. This query is extremely easy to +execute and would be done in a few seconds. + +Does anyone know of a way of adding foreign key constraints faster in +PostgreSQL? Or, if there is no solution, do you guys know of any reasons +why a solution like the one I described above would or would not work, and +could or could not be built into PostgreSQL at some point? + +Regards, +Bart + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 23 14:30:06 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2EA1475F16 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 14:30:04 -0500 (EST) +Received: from megazone.bigpanda.com (megazone.bigpanda.com [63.150.15.178]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78CA0475F09 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 14:30:04 -0500 (EST) +Received: by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id 5C1BBD600; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 11:30:04 -0800 (PST) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 41A835C03; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 11:30:04 -0800 (PST) +Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 11:30:04 -0800 (PST) +From: Stephan Szabo +To: +Cc: +Subject: Re: Adding a foreign key constraint is extremely slow +In-Reply-To: <20505.194.109.187.67.1048442304.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> +Message-ID: <20030323112241.W14634-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-19.5 required=5.0 + tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50-cvs +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50-cvs (1.172-2003-02-14-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/158 +X-Sequence-Number: 1456 + + +On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 bsamwel@xs4all.nl wrote: + +> Hi guys, +> +> I'm having another performance problem as well. I have two tables called +> "wwwlog" (about 100 bytes per row, 1.2 million records) and table called +> "triples" (about 20 bytes per row, 0.9 million records). Triples contains +> an integer foreign key to wwwlog, but it was not marked as a foreign key +> at the point of table creation. Now, when I do: +> +> alter table triples add foreign key(id1) references wwwlog(id); +> +> PostgreSQL starts doing heavy work for at least one and a half hour, and I +> broke it off at that. It is not possible to "explain" a statement like +> this! Probably what it does is that it will check the foreign key +> constraint for every field in the table. This will make it completely + +In fact it does exactly this. It could be done using +select * from fk where not exists (select * from pk where ...) +or another optimized method, but noone's gotten to changing it. I didn't +do it in the start becase I didn't want to duplicate the check logic if it +could be helped. + +As a temporary workaround until something is done(assuming you know the +data is valid), set the constraints before loading then turn off triggers +on the tables (see pg_dump's data only output for an example), load the +data and turn them back on. + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sun Mar 23 16:55:57 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC4C475A4B + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 16:55:55 -0500 (EST) +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 134D7475A45 + for ; + Sun, 23 Mar 2003 16:55:55 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2918859; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 13:55:46 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: bsamwel@xs4all.nl, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Slow update of indexed column with many nulls +Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 13:55:02 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +References: <21139.194.109.187.67.1048441138.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> +In-Reply-To: <21139.194.109.187.67.1048441138.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Message-Id: <200303231355.02826.josh@agliodbs.com> +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-25.4 required=5.0 + tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, + USER_AGENT_KMAIL autolearn=ham version=2.50-cvs +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50-cvs (1.172-2003-02-14-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/159 +X-Sequence-Number: 1457 + +Bart, + +> insert into foo (baz) values (28); +> create index foo_idx on foo(baz); +> vacuum full analyze foo; +> +> Now, we would expect that PostgreSQL is fully aware that there are not +> many rows in foo that have "baz is not null". However: + +This is a known issue discussed several times on this list. Try re-creati= +ng=20 +your index as: + +create index foo_idx on foo(baz) where foo is not null; + +See the list archives for the reasons why. This may improve in future=20 +releases of PostgreSQL. + +--=20 +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 13:45:48 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A4F476241 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:45:46 -0500 (EST) +Received: from Mail (mail.waterford.org [205.124.117.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0D1F4761C0 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:45:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: by Mail + with XWall v3.25 ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:45:23 -0700 +From: Oleg Lebedev +To: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Slow query +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:48:52 -0700 +X-Assembled-By: XWall v3.25 +Message-ID: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5A@postoffice.waterford.org> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/mixed; + boundary="_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb" +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART,MIME_SUSPECT_NAME, + TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/160 +X-Sequence-Number: 1458 + +This is a multi part message in MIME format. + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="_NextPart_2_pSwAJCCvjOFJEEEBjzylneexksz" + +--_NextPart_2_pSwAJCCvjOFJEEEBjzylneexksz +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +Please help me speed up the following query. It used to run in 2-5 sec., +but now it takes 2-3 mins! +I ran VACUUM FULL ANALYZE and REINDEX. +SELECT * FROM media m +WHERE m.mediatype =3D (SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE +medianame=3D'Audio')=20 +AND EXISTS=20 + (SELECT * FROM=20 + (SELECT objectid AS mediaid=20 + FROM media=20 + WHERE activity=3D'347667'=20 + UNION=20 + SELECT ism.media AS mediaid=20 + FROM intsetmedia ism, set s=20 + WHERE ism.set =3D s.objectid=20 + AND s.activity=3D'347667' ) AS a1=20 + WHERE a1.mediaid =3D m.objectid=20 + LIMIT 1)=20 +ORDER BY medianame ASC, status DESC=20 +=20 +Basically it tries to find all Audios that are either explicitly +attached to the given activity, or attached to the given activity via a +many-to-many relationship intsetmedia which links records in table +Interaction, Set, and Media. +I attached the output of EXPLAIN and schemas and indexes on the tables +involved. Most of the fields are not relevant to the query, but I listed +them anyways. I discarded trigger information, though. +Thanks for your help. +=20 +Oleg + + +************************************* + +This email may contain privileged or confidential material intended for the= + named recipient only. +If you are not the named recipient, delete this message and all attachments= +.=20=20 +Any review, copying, printing, disclosure or other use is prohibited. +We reserve the right to monitor email sent through our network. + +************************************* + +--_NextPart_2_pSwAJCCvjOFJEEEBjzylneexksz +Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + + +Message + + + +
Please he= +lp me speed=20 +up the following query. It used to run in 2-5 sec., but now it takes 2-3=20 +mins!
+
I ran VAC= +UUM FULL=20 +ANALYZE and REINDEX.
+
SELECT * = +FROM media=20 +m
+
WHERE m.m= +ediatype =3D=20 +(SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE medianame=3D'Audio') +
AND EXIST= +S=20 +
+
        (SELECT * FROM=20 +
+
           = +    =20 +(SELECT objectid AS mediaid
+
           = +    =20 +FROM media
+
           = +    =20 +WHERE activity=3D'347667'
+
           = +    =20 +UNION
+
           = +    =20 +SELECT ism.media AS mediaid
+
           = +    =20 +FROM intsetmedia ism, set s
+
           = +    =20 +WHERE ism.set =3D s.objectid
+
           = +    =20 +AND s.activity=3D'347667' ) AS a1
+
        WHERE a1.mediaid =3D m.= +objectid=20 +
+
        LIMIT 1) = +
+
ORDER BY medianame ASC, status DESC +
 
+
Basically= + it tries=20 +to find all Audios that are either explicitly attached to the given activit= +y, or=20 +attached to the given activity via a many-to-many relationship intsetmedia = +which=20 +links records in table Interaction, Set, and Media.
+
I attache= +d the=20 +output of EXPLAIN and schemas and indexes on the tables involved. Most of t= +he=20 +fields are not relevant to the query, but I listed them anyways. I discarde= +d=20 +trigger information, though.
+
Thanks fo= +r your=20 +help.
+
 
+
Oleg
+

+*************************************
+

+This email may contain privileged or confidential material intended for the= + named recipient only.
+If you are not the named recipient, delete this message and all attachments= +.
+Any review, copying, printing, disclosure or other use is prohibited.
+We reserve the right to monitor email sent through our network.
+

+*************************************
+

+ + + +--_NextPart_2_pSwAJCCvjOFJEEEBjzylneexksz-- + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: text/text; name="plan.txt" +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="plan.txt" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 + +UVVFUlkgUExBTiANCiBTb3J0IChjb3N0PTU1MzY1Ny42Ni4uNTUzNjYyLjU3 +IHJvd3M9MTk2MyB3aWR0aD0yMTgpIA0KICBTb3J0IEtleTogbWVkaWFuYW1l +LCBzdGF0dXMgDQogIEluaXRQbGFuIA0KICAtPiBTZXEgU2NhbiBvbiBtZWRp +YXR5cGUgKGNvc3Q9MC4wMC4uMS4yOSByb3dzPTEgd2lkdGg9OCkgDQogIEZp +bHRlcjogKG1lZGlhbmFtZSA9ICdBdWRpbyc6OmNoYXJhY3RlciB2YXJ5aW5n +KSANCiAgLT4gSW5kZXggU2NhbiB1c2luZyBtZWRpYV9tdHlwZV9pbmRleCBv +biBtZWRpYSBtIChjb3N0PTAuMDAuLjU1MzU1MC4yOCByb3dzPTE5NjMgd2lk +dGg9MjE4KSANCiAgSW5kZXggQ29uZDogKG1lZGlhdHlwZSA9ICQwKSANCiAg +RmlsdGVyOiAoc3VicGxhbikgDQogIFN1YlBsYW4gDQogIC0+IExpbWl0IChj +b3N0PTEzOC45Mi4uMTM4LjkzIHJvd3M9MSB3aWR0aD0yNCkgDQogIC0+IFN1 +YnF1ZXJ5IFNjYW4gYTEgKGNvc3Q9MTM4LjkyLi4xMzguOTMgcm93cz0xIHdp +ZHRoPTI0KSANCiAgLT4gVW5pcXVlIChjb3N0PTEzOC45Mi4uMTM4LjkzIHJv +d3M9MSB3aWR0aD0yNCkgDQogIC0+IFNvcnQgKGNvc3Q9MTM4LjkyLi4xMzgu +OTMgcm93cz0yIHdpZHRoPTI0KSANCiAgU29ydCBLZXk6IG1lZGlhaWQgDQog +IC0+IEFwcGVuZCAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi4xMzguOTEgcm93cz0yIHdpZHRoPTI0 +KSANCiAgLT4gU3VicXVlcnkgU2NhbiAiKlNFTEVDVCogMSIgKGNvc3Q9MC4w +MC4uNS4xMSByb3dzPTEgd2lkdGg9OCkgDQogIC0+IEluZGV4IFNjYW4gdXNp +bmcgbWVkaWFfcGtleSBvbiBtZWRpYSAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi41LjExIHJvd3M9 +MSB3aWR0aD04KSANCiAgSW5kZXggQ29uZDogKG9iamVjdGlkID0gJDEpIA0K +ICBGaWx0ZXI6IChhY3Rpdml0eSA9IDM0NzY2Nzo6YmlnaW50KSANCiAgLT4g +U3VicXVlcnkgU2NhbiAiKlNFTEVDVCogMiIgKGNvc3Q9MjQuMjUuLjEzMy44 +MCByb3dzPTEgd2lkdGg9MjQpIA0KICAtPiBIYXNoIEpvaW4gKGNvc3Q9MjQu +MjUuLjEzMy44MCByb3dzPTEgd2lkdGg9MjQpIA0KICBIYXNoIENvbmQ6ICgi +b3V0ZXIiLiJzZXQiID0gImlubmVyIi5vYmplY3RpZCkgDQogIC0+IEluZGV4 +IFNjYW4gdXNpbmcgaW50c2V0bWVkaWFfbWVkaWFfaW5kZXggb24gaW50c2V0 +bWVkaWEgaXNtIChjb3N0PTAuMDAuLjEwOS4yNiByb3dzPTM4IHdpZHRoPTE2 +KSANCiAgSW5kZXggQ29uZDogKG1lZGlhID0gJDEpIA0KICAtPiBIYXNoIChj +b3N0PTI0LjI0Li4yNC4yNCByb3dzPTYgd2lkdGg9OCkgDQogIC0+IEluZGV4 +IFNjYW4gdXNpbmcgc2V0X2FjdF9pbmRleCBvbiAic2V0IiBzIChjb3N0PTAu +MDAuLjI0LjI0IHJvd3M9NiB3aWR0aD04KSANCiAgSW5kZXggQ29uZDogKGFj +dGl2aXR5ID0gMzQ3NjY3OjpiaWdpbnQpIA0K + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: text/text; name="schemas.txt" +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="schemas.txt" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 + +ICAgICBUYWJsZSAicHVibGljLmludHNldG1lZGlhIg0KICAgIENvbHVtbiAg +ICAgfCAgVHlwZSAgIHwgTW9kaWZpZXJzIA0KLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tKy0t +LS0tLS0tLSstLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KIGludGVyYWN0aW9uICAgfCBiaWdpbnQg +IHwgbm90IG51bGwNCiBzZXQgICAgICAgICAgIHwgYmlnaW50ICB8IG5vdCBu +dWxsDQogbWVkaWEgICAgICAgICB8IGJpZ2ludCAgfCBub3QgbnVsbA0KIG9i +amVjdGlkICAgICAgfCBiaWdpbnQgIHwgbm90IG51bGwNCiBvYmplY3R2ZXJz +aW9uIHwgaW50ZWdlciB8IG5vdCBudWxsDQpJbmRleGVzOiBpbnRzZXRtZWRp +YV9wa2V5IHByaW1hcnkga2V5IGJ0cmVlIChvYmplY3RpZCksDQogICAgICAg +ICBpbnRzZXRtZWRpYV9pc21faW5kZXggdW5pcXVlIGJ0cmVlIChpbnRlcmFj +dGlvbiwgInNldCIsIG1lZGlhKSwNCiAgICAgICAgIGludHNldG1lZGlhX21l +ZGlhX2luZGV4IGJ0cmVlIChtZWRpYSksDQogICAgICAgICBpbnRzZXRtZWRp +YV9zZXRfaW5kZXggYnRyZWUgKCJzZXQiKQ0KDQoNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICAgVGFibGUgInB1YmxpYy5pbnRlcmFjdGlvbiINCiAgICAgQ29sdW1u +ICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgIFR5cGUgICAgICAgICAgfCAgICAgICBNb2RpZmll +cnMgICAgICAgIA0KLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSstLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t +LS0tLS0tLS0rLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQogaW50ZGVzYyAg +ICAgICAgfCBjaGFyYWN0ZXIgdmFyeWluZygyNTYpIHwgbm90IG51bGwgZGVm +YXVsdCAnJw0KIHN0YXRlICAgICAgICAgIHwgYmlnaW50ICAgICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICB8IA0KIGludHR5cGUgICAgICAgIHwgY2hhcmFjdGVyIHZhcnlpbmco +MzIpICB8IG5vdCBudWxsIGRlZmF1bHQgJycNCiBudW1iZXIgICAgICAgICB8 +IGludGVnZXIgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCBub3QgbnVsbA0KIHZpZGVvICAg +ICAgICAgIHwgYmlnaW50ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IA0KIG5lZWRzZGF0 +YXRhYmxlIHwgYm9vbGVhbiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IG5vdCBudWxsIGRl +ZmF1bHQgZmFsc2UNCiBvYmplY3RpZCAgICAgICB8IGJpZ2ludCAgICAgICAg +ICAgICAgICAgfCBub3QgbnVsbA0KIG9iamVjdHZlcnNpb24gIHwgaW50ZWdl +ciAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IG5vdCBudWxsDQpJbmRleGVzOiBpbnRlcmFj +dGlvbl9wa2V5IHByaW1hcnkga2V5IGJ0cmVlIChvYmplY3RpZCkNCg0KDQoN +CiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFRhYmxl +ICJwdWJsaWMuc2V0Ig0KICAgICAgQ29sdW1uICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAg +IFR5cGUgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgDQpNb2Rp +ZmllcnMgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICANCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t +LSstLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSstLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t +LS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tKy0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t +LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tKy0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0K +IHJlZmVyZW5jZSAgICAgICAgfCBpbnRlZ2VyICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +ICAgfCBub3QgbnVsbA0KIGFjdGl2aXR5ICAgICAgICAgfCBiaWdpbnQgICAg +ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCBub3QgbnVsbA0KIHNjZW5lICAgICAgICAg +ICAgfCBiaWdpbnQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCANCiBzZXRkZXNj +ICAgICAgICAgIHwgY2hhcmFjdGVyIHZhcnlpbmcoNDAwMCkgICAgIHwgbm90 +IG51bGwgZGVmYXVsdCAnTm8gc2V0IA0KZGVzY3JpcHRpb24gYXZhaWxhYmxl +LicNCiBhY3R0eXBlICAgICAgICAgIHwgYmlnaW50ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICAgIHwgbm90IG51bGwNCiBtZW51dHlwZSAgICAgICAgIHwgYmlnaW50 +ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgbm90IG51bGwNCiByZW1lZGlhdGUg +ICAgICAgIHwgYm9vbGVhbiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgZGVmYXVs +dCBmYWxzZQ0KIG5vcm1hbCAgICAgICAgICAgfCBib29sZWFuICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICAgICAgICAgfCBkZWZhdWx0IGZhbHNlDQogcGxheXByYWN0aWNlICAg +ICB8IGJvb2xlYW4gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IGRlZmF1bHQgZmFs +c2UNCiBmaXJzdHRpbWVvbmx5ICAgIHwgYm9vbGVhbiAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICAgIHwgZGVmYXVsdCBmYWxzZQ0KIGF2ZXRpbWUgICAgICAgICAgfCBp +bnRlZ2VyICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCANCiBtZW51aW1hZ2UgICAg +ICAgIHwgY2hhcmFjdGVyIHZhcnlpbmcoMjU2KSAgICAgIHwgZGVmYXVsdCAn +Jw0KIHNjb3JlcyAgICAgICAgICAgfCBib29sZWFuICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICAgfCBkZWZhdWx0IGZhbHNlDQogbWlucnVuICAgICAgICAgICB8IGlu +dGVnZXIgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IA0KIG1heHJ1biAgICAgICAg +ICAgfCBpbnRlZ2VyICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCANCiBpZ25vcmV0 +eXBlICAgICAgIHwgYm9vbGVhbiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgZGVm +YXVsdCBmYWxzZQ0KIGF1dG9tYXRpY2l0eSAgICAgfCBpbnRlZ2VyICAgICAg +ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCANCiByZXZpZXcgICAgICAgICAgIHwgYm9vbGVh +biAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgZGVmYXVsdCBmYWxzZQ0KIGxlYXJu +aW5nb2JqICAgICAgfCBjaGFyYWN0ZXIgdmFyeWluZygyNTYpICAgICAgfCBk +ZWZhdWx0ICcnDQogc2V0bmFtZSAgICAgICAgICB8IGNoYXJhY3RlciB2YXJ5 +aW5nKDY0KSAgICAgICB8IGRlZmF1bHQgJycNCiBvYmplY3RpZCAgICAgICAg +IHwgYmlnaW50ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgbm90IG51bGwNCiBv +YmplY3R2ZXJzaW9uICAgIHwgaW50ZWdlciAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +IHwgbm90IG51bGwNCiBpY29uICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgY2hhcmFjdGVyIHZh +cnlpbmcoNjQpICAgICAgIHwgDQogY29kZXN0YXR1cyAgICAgICB8IGJpZ2lu +dCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IG5vdCBudWxsDQogc3RhdHVzY2hh +bmdlZGF0ZSB8IHRpbWVzdGFtcCB3aXRob3V0IHRpbWUgem9uZSB8IA0KIGNv +bnNpZGVyYXRpb25zICAgfCBjaGFyYWN0ZXIgdmFyeWluZygyNTYpICAgICAg +fCANCkluZGV4ZXM6IHNldF9wa2V5IHByaW1hcnkga2V5IGJ0cmVlIChvYmpl +Y3RpZCksDQogICAgICAgICBzZXRfYWN0X2luZGV4IGJ0cmVlIChhY3Rpdml0 +eSkNCg0KDQoNCg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFRhYmxlICJw +dWJsaWMubWVkaWEiDQogICAgICBDb2x1bW4gICAgICB8ICAgICAgICAgICAg +VHlwZSAgICAgICAgICAgICB8ICAgICAgTW9kaWZpZXJzICAgICAgDQotLS0t +LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0rLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0r +LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQogbWVkaWF0eXBlICAgICAgICB8IGJp +Z2ludCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IG5vdCBudWxsDQogbWVkaWFj +aGFyICAgICAgICB8IGJpZ2ludCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IA0K +IHN0YXR1cyAgICAgICAgICAgfCBjaGFyYWN0ZXIgdmFyeWluZygzMCkgICAg +ICAgfCBub3QgbnVsbCBkZWZhdWx0ICcnDQogc29ydCAgICAgICAgICAgICB8 +IHJlYWwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IG5vdCBudWxsIGRlZmF1 +bHQgMA0KIGZvcm1hdCAgICAgICAgICAgfCBjaGFyYWN0ZXIgdmFyeWluZygz +MikgICAgICAgfCBkZWZhdWx0ICcnDQogZmlsZW5hbWUgICAgICAgICB8IGNo +YXJhY3RlciB2YXJ5aW5nKDI1NikgICAgICB8IG5vdCBudWxsIGRlZmF1bHQg +JycNCiBtZWRpYWRlc2MgICAgICAgIHwgY2hhcmFjdGVyIHZhcnlpbmcoNDAw +MCkgICAgIHwgZGVmYXVsdCAnJw0KIG1lZGlhbmFtZSAgICAgICAgfCBjaGFy +YWN0ZXIgdmFyeWluZyg0MDAwKSAgICAgfCBub3QgbnVsbCBkZWZhdWx0ICcn +DQogdmlkZW8gICAgICAgICAgICB8IGJpZ2ludCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICB8IA0KIGhpZ2hsaWdodCAgICAgICAgfCBpbnRlZ2VyICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICAgICAgICAgfCBkZWZhdWx0IDANCiBoaWdobGlnaHRlciAgICAgIHwg +Y2hhcmFjdGVyIHZhcnlpbmcoMzIpICAgICAgIHwgZGVmYXVsdCAnJw0KIGFj +dGl2aXR5ICAgICAgICAgfCBiaWdpbnQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +fCBub3QgbnVsbA0KIGxhc3R1cGRhdGVkYnkgICAgfCBjaGFyYWN0ZXIgdmFy +eWluZygzMCkgICAgICAgfCBkZWZhdWx0ICcnDQogaGlnaGxpZ2h0ZWRtZWRp +YSB8IGJpZ2ludCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IA0KIGFydHR5cGUg +ICAgICAgICAgfCBiaWdpbnQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCANCiB3 +YWl0c3luY21lZGlhICAgIHwgYmlnaW50ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +IHwgDQoga2V5ICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IGNoYXJhY3RlciB2YXJ5aW5nKDMy +KSAgICAgICB8IGRlZmF1bHQgJycNCiBwcm9kdWN0aW9uY291bnQgIHwgaW50 +ZWdlciAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgZGVmYXVsdCAwDQogb2JqZWN0 +aWQgICAgICAgICB8IGJpZ2ludCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IG5v +dCBudWxsDQogb2JqZWN0dmVyc2lvbiAgICB8IGludGVnZXIgICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICAgICAgICB8IG5vdCBudWxsDQogY3ZzcGF0aHN0YXR1cyAgICB8IGJp +Z2ludCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IG5vdCBudWxsDQogdXBkYXRl +ZGF0ZSAgICAgICB8IHRpbWVzdGFtcCB3aXRob3V0IHRpbWUgem9uZSB8IA0K +SW5kZXhlczogbWVkaWFfcGtleSBwcmltYXJ5IGtleSBidHJlZSAob2JqZWN0 +aWQpLA0KICAgICAgICAgbWVkaWFfYWN0X2luZGV4IGJ0cmVlIChhY3Rpdml0 +eSksDQogICAgICAgICBtZWRpYV9mbmFtZV9pbmRleCBidHJlZSAoZmlsZW5h +bWUpLA0KICAgICAgICAgbWVkaWFfbWNoYXJfaW5kZXggYnRyZWUgKG1lZGlh +Y2hhciksDQogICAgICAgICBtZWRpYV9tbmFtZV9pbmRleCBidHJlZSAobWVk +aWFuYW1lKSwNCiAgICAgICAgIG1lZGlhX210eXBlX2luZGV4IGJ0cmVlICht +ZWRpYXR5cGUpDQo= + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 13:54:55 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3450647610A + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:54:54 -0500 (EST) +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A33E475F53 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:54:53 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2920293; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:54:42 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: Oleg Lebedev , + "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:54:49 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +References: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5A@postoffice.waterford.org> +In-Reply-To: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5A@postoffice.waterford.org> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Message-Id: <200303241054.49325.josh@agliodbs.com> +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-31.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,UPPERCASE_25_50,USER_AGENT_KMAIL + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/161 +X-Sequence-Number: 1459 + +Oleg, + +> Please help me speed up the following query. It used to run in 2-5 sec., +> but now it takes 2-3 mins! +> I ran VACUUM FULL ANALYZE and REINDEX. +> SELECT * FROM media m +> WHERE m.mediatype =3D (SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE + +This is a repost, isn't it? + +--=20 +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 13:59:26 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41EA547636E + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:59:25 -0500 (EST) +Received: from Mail (mail.waterford.org [205.124.117.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59C8E47635B + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:59:22 -0500 (EST) +Received: by Mail + with XWall v3.25 ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:59:21 -0700 +From: Oleg Lebedev +To: Josh Berkus , + "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 12:02:51 -0700 +X-Assembled-By: XWall v3.25 +Message-ID: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5C@postoffice.waterford.org> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_10,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/162 +X-Sequence-Number: 1460 + +No, I don't believe so. +My previous question regarding performance was solved by VACUUM FULL and +REINDEX. +The current one, I believe, is more related to query structure and +planner stats. + +-----Original Message----- +From: Josh Berkus [mailto:josh@agliodbs.com]=20 +Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 11:55 AM +To: Oleg Lebedev; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow query + + +Oleg, + +> Please help me speed up the following query. It used to run in 2-5=20 +> sec., but now it takes 2-3 mins! I ran VACUUM FULL ANALYZE and=20 +> REINDEX. SELECT * FROM media m +> WHERE m.mediatype =3D (SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE + +This is a repost, isn't it? + +--=20 +Josh Berkus +Aglio Database Solutions +San Francisco + + +************************************* + +This email may contain privileged or confidential material intended for the= + named recipient only. +If you are not the named recipient, delete this message and all attachments= +.=20=20 +Any review, copying, printing, disclosure or other use is prohibited. +We reserve the right to monitor email sent through our network. + +************************************* + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 14:03:48 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DEB6474E44 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:03:46 -0500 (EST) +Received: from megazone.bigpanda.com (megazone.bigpanda.com [63.150.15.178]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A9E647631B + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:03:42 -0500 (EST) +Received: by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) + id 64263D62F; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:03:42 -0800 (PST) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 55A055C0A; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:03:42 -0800 (PST) +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:03:42 -0800 (PST) +From: Stephan Szabo +To: Oleg Lebedev +Cc: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +In-Reply-To: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5A@postoffice.waterford.org> +Message-ID: <20030324110115.A25958-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-26.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/163 +X-Sequence-Number: 1461 + + +On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Oleg Lebedev wrote: + +> Please help me speed up the following query. It used to run in 2-5 sec., +> but now it takes 2-3 mins! + +EXPLAIN ANALYZE output would be useful to see where the time is actually +taking place (rather than an estimate thereof). + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 14:16:46 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 121F9475F0D + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:16:45 -0500 (EST) +Received: from Mail (mail.waterford.org [205.124.117.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E136475F09 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:16:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: by Mail + with XWall v3.25 ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 12:16:44 -0700 +From: Oleg Lebedev +To: Stephan Szabo +Cc: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 12:20:13 -0700 +X-Assembled-By: XWall v3.25 +Message-ID: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5D@postoffice.waterford.org> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/mixed; + boundary="_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb" +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.6 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART,MIME_SUSPECT_NAME, + QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/164 +X-Sequence-Number: 1462 + +This is a multi part message in MIME format. + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +EXPLAIN ANALYZE plan is shown below. +I also attached it as a file. + +One thing that might help is that the query produces 27 rows, which is +much less than predicted 1963. + +QUERY PLAN=20 + Sort (cost=3D553657.66..553662.57 rows=3D1963 width=3D218) (actual +time=3D133036.73..133036.75 rows=3D27 loops=3D1)=20 + Sort Key: medianame, status=20 + InitPlan=20 + -> Seq Scan on mediatype (cost=3D0.00..1.29 rows=3D1 width=3D8) (actual +time=3D0.12..0.14 rows=3D1 loops=3D1)=20 + Filter: (medianame =3D 'Audio'::character varying)=20 + -> Index Scan using media_mtype_index on media m (cost=3D0.00..553550.28 +rows=3D1963 width=3D218) (actual time=3D5153.36..133036.00 rows=3D27 loops= +=3D1)=20 + Index Cond: (mediatype =3D $0)=20 + Filter: (subplan)=20 + SubPlan=20 + -> Limit (cost=3D138.92..138.93 rows=3D1 width=3D24) (actual time=3D2.92.= +.2.92 +rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + -> Subquery Scan a1 (cost=3D138.92..138.93 rows=3D1 width=3D24) (actual +time=3D2.92..2.92 rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + -> Unique (cost=3D138.92..138.93 rows=3D1 width=3D24) (actual +time=3D2.91..2.91 rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + -> Sort (cost=3D138.92..138.93 rows=3D2 width=3D24) (actual time=3D2.91..= +2.91 +rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + Sort Key: mediaid=20 + -> Append (cost=3D0.00..138.91 rows=3D2 width=3D24) (actual time=3D2.80..= +2.81 +rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + -> Subquery Scan "*SELECT* 1" (cost=3D0.00..5.11 rows=3D1 width=3D8) (act= +ual +time=3D0.06..0.06 rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + -> Index Scan using media_pkey on media (cost=3D0.00..5.11 rows=3D1 +width=3D8) (actual time=3D0.05..0.05 rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + Index Cond: (objectid =3D $1)=20 + Filter: (activity =3D 347667::bigint)=20 + -> Subquery Scan "*SELECT* 2" (cost=3D24.25..133.80 rows=3D1 width=3D24) +(actual time=3D2.73..2.73 rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + -> Hash Join (cost=3D24.25..133.80 rows=3D1 width=3D24) (actual +time=3D2.72..2.72 rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + Hash Cond: ("outer"."set" =3D "inner".objectid)=20 + -> Index Scan using intsetmedia_media_index on intsetmedia ism +(cost=3D0.00..109.26 rows=3D38 width=3D16) (actual time=3D0.04..0.04 rows= +=3D1 +loops=3D44876)=20 + Index Cond: (media =3D $1)=20 + -> Hash (cost=3D24.24..24.24 rows=3D6 width=3D8) (actual time=3D0.14..0.14 +rows=3D0 loops=3D44876)=20 + -> Index Scan using set_act_index on "set" s (cost=3D0.00..24.24 rows=3D6 +width=3D8) (actual time=3D0.11..0.13 rows=3D2 loops=3D44876)=20 + Index Cond: (activity =3D 347667::bigint)=20 + Total runtime: 133037.49 msec=20 + + +-----Original Message----- +From: Stephan Szabo [mailto:sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com]=20 +Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 12:04 PM +To: Oleg Lebedev +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow query + + + +On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Oleg Lebedev wrote: + +> Please help me speed up the following query. It used to run in 2-5=20 +> sec., but now it takes 2-3 mins! + +EXPLAIN ANALYZE output would be useful to see where the time is actually +taking place (rather than an estimate thereof). + + + +************************************* + +This email may contain privileged or confidential material intended for the= + named recipient only. +If you are not the named recipient, delete this message and all attachments= +.=20=20 +Any review, copying, printing, disclosure or other use is prohibited. +We reserve the right to monitor email sent through our network. + +************************************* + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: text/text; name="plan.txt" +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="plan.txt" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 + +UVVFUlkgUExBTiANCiBTb3J0IChjb3N0PTU1MzY1Ny42Ni4uNTUzNjYyLjU3 +IHJvd3M9MTk2MyB3aWR0aD0yMTgpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0xMzMwMzYuNzMu +LjEzMzAzNi43NSByb3dzPTI3IGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICBTb3J0IEtleTogbWVk +aWFuYW1lLCBzdGF0dXMgDQogIEluaXRQbGFuIA0KICAtPiBTZXEgU2NhbiBv +biBtZWRpYXR5cGUgKGNvc3Q9MC4wMC4uMS4yOSByb3dzPTEgd2lkdGg9OCkg +KGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMTIuLjAuMTQgcm93cz0xIGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICBG +aWx0ZXI6IChtZWRpYW5hbWUgPSAnQXVkaW8nOjpjaGFyYWN0ZXIgdmFyeWlu +ZykgDQogIC0+IEluZGV4IFNjYW4gdXNpbmcgbWVkaWFfbXR5cGVfaW5kZXgg +b24gbWVkaWEgbSAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi41NTM1NTAuMjggcm93cz0xOTYzIHdp +ZHRoPTIxOCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTUxNTMuMzYuLjEzMzAzNi4wMCByb3dz +PTI3IGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICBJbmRleCBDb25kOiAobWVkaWF0eXBlID0gJDAp +IA0KICBGaWx0ZXI6IChzdWJwbGFuKSANCiAgU3ViUGxhbiANCiAgLT4gTGlt +aXQgKGNvc3Q9MTM4LjkyLi4xMzguOTMgcm93cz0xIHdpZHRoPTI0KSAoYWN0 +dWFsIHRpbWU9Mi45Mi4uMi45MiByb3dzPTAgbG9vcHM9NDQ4NzYpIA0KICAt +PiBTdWJxdWVyeSBTY2FuIGExIChjb3N0PTEzOC45Mi4uMTM4LjkzIHJvd3M9 +MSB3aWR0aD0yNCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTIuOTIuLjIuOTIgcm93cz0wIGxv +b3BzPTQ0ODc2KSANCiAgLT4gVW5pcXVlIChjb3N0PTEzOC45Mi4uMTM4Ljkz +IHJvd3M9MSB3aWR0aD0yNCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTIuOTEuLjIuOTEgcm93 +cz0wIGxvb3BzPTQ0ODc2KSANCiAgLT4gU29ydCAoY29zdD0xMzguOTIuLjEz +OC45MyByb3dzPTIgd2lkdGg9MjQpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0yLjkxLi4yLjkx +IHJvd3M9MCBsb29wcz00NDg3NikgDQogIFNvcnQgS2V5OiBtZWRpYWlkIA0K +ICAtPiBBcHBlbmQgKGNvc3Q9MC4wMC4uMTM4LjkxIHJvd3M9MiB3aWR0aD0y +NCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTIuODAuLjIuODEgcm93cz0wIGxvb3BzPTQ0ODc2 +KSANCiAgLT4gU3VicXVlcnkgU2NhbiAiKlNFTEVDVCogMSIgKGNvc3Q9MC4w +MC4uNS4xMSByb3dzPTEgd2lkdGg9OCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMDYuLjAu +MDYgcm93cz0wIGxvb3BzPTQ0ODc2KSANCiAgLT4gSW5kZXggU2NhbiB1c2lu +ZyBtZWRpYV9wa2V5IG9uIG1lZGlhIChjb3N0PTAuMDAuLjUuMTEgcm93cz0x +IHdpZHRoPTgpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0wLjA1Li4wLjA1IHJvd3M9MCBsb29w +cz00NDg3NikgDQogIEluZGV4IENvbmQ6IChvYmplY3RpZCA9ICQxKSANCiAg +RmlsdGVyOiAoYWN0aXZpdHkgPSAzNDc2Njc6OmJpZ2ludCkgDQogIC0+IFN1 +YnF1ZXJ5IFNjYW4gIipTRUxFQ1QqIDIiIChjb3N0PTI0LjI1Li4xMzMuODAg +cm93cz0xIHdpZHRoPTI0KSAoYWN0dWFsIHRpbWU9Mi43My4uMi43MyByb3dz +PTAgbG9vcHM9NDQ4NzYpIA0KICAtPiBIYXNoIEpvaW4gKGNvc3Q9MjQuMjUu +LjEzMy44MCByb3dzPTEgd2lkdGg9MjQpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0yLjcyLi4y +LjcyIHJvd3M9MCBsb29wcz00NDg3NikgDQogIEhhc2ggQ29uZDogKCJvdXRl +ciIuInNldCIgPSAiaW5uZXIiLm9iamVjdGlkKSANCiAgLT4gSW5kZXggU2Nh +biB1c2luZyBpbnRzZXRtZWRpYV9tZWRpYV9pbmRleCBvbiBpbnRzZXRtZWRp +YSBpc20gKGNvc3Q9MC4wMC4uMTA5LjI2IHJvd3M9Mzggd2lkdGg9MTYpIChh +Y3R1YWwgdGltZT0wLjA0Li4wLjA0IHJvd3M9MSBsb29wcz00NDg3NikgDQog +IEluZGV4IENvbmQ6IChtZWRpYSA9ICQxKSANCiAgLT4gSGFzaCAoY29zdD0y +NC4yNC4uMjQuMjQgcm93cz02IHdpZHRoPTgpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0wLjE0 +Li4wLjE0IHJvd3M9MCBsb29wcz00NDg3NikgDQogIC0+IEluZGV4IFNjYW4g +dXNpbmcgc2V0X2FjdF9pbmRleCBvbiAic2V0IiBzIChjb3N0PTAuMDAuLjI0 +LjI0IHJvd3M9NiB3aWR0aD04KSAoYWN0dWFsIHRpbWU9MC4xMS4uMC4xMyBy +b3dzPTIgbG9vcHM9NDQ4NzYpIA0KICBJbmRleCBDb25kOiAoYWN0aXZpdHkg +PSAzNDc2Njc6OmJpZ2ludCkgDQogVG90YWwgcnVudGltZTogMTMzMDM3LjQ5 +IG1zZWMgDQo= + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 14:47:23 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C7E34762CF + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:47:22 -0500 (EST) +Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (unknown [209.10.40.251]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DF31476241 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:47:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO temoku) + by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) + with ESMTP id 2920444; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:47:06 -0800 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: Josh Berkus +Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com +Organization: Aglio Database Solutions +To: Stephan Szabo , + "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:47:09 -0800 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +References: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5A@postoffice.waterford.org> +In-Reply-To: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5A@postoffice.waterford.org> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303241147.09853.josh@agliodbs.com> +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-19.2 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_20,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES,USER_AGENT_KMAIL + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/165 +X-Sequence-Number: 1463 + +Stephan, + +Hmmm ... I'm a bit confused by the new EXPLAIN output. Stefan, does Oleg'= +s=20 +output show the time for *one* subplan execution, executed for 44,000 loops= +,=20 +or does it show the total time? The former would make more sense given his= +=20 +query, but I'm just not sure .... + + +--=20 +-Josh Berkus + Aglio Database Solutions + San Francisco + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 15:25:18 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03BB6475F0D + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:25:18 -0500 (EST) +Received: from Mail (mail.waterford.org [205.124.117.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D271475F09 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:25:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: by Mail + with XWall v3.25 ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:25:17 -0700 +From: Oleg Lebedev +To: "josh@agliodbs.com" , + Stephan Szabo , + "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:28:47 -0700 +X-Assembled-By: XWall v3.25 +Message-ID: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5E@postoffice.waterford.org> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.8 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10 + version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/166 +X-Sequence-Number: 1464 + +I decided that it might help to list the cardinalities of the pertinent +tables: +Intsetmedia: 90,000 rows +Interaction: 26,000 rows +Set: 7,000 rows +Media: 80,000 rows + +-----Original Message----- +From: Josh Berkus [mailto:josh@agliodbs.com]=20 +Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 12:47 PM +To: Stephan Szabo; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow query +Importance: Low + + +Stephan, + +Hmmm ... I'm a bit confused by the new EXPLAIN output. Stefan, does +Oleg's=20 +output show the time for *one* subplan execution, executed for 44,000 +loops,=20 +or does it show the total time? The former would make more sense given +his=20 +query, but I'm just not sure .... + + +--=20 +-Josh Berkus + Aglio Database Solutions + San Francisco + + +---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster + + +************************************* + +This email may contain privileged or confidential material intended for the= + named recipient only. +If you are not the named recipient, delete this message and all attachments= +.=20=20 +Any review, copying, printing, disclosure or other use is prohibited. +We reserve the right to monitor email sent through our network. + +************************************* + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 15:48:42 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40E65475F5F + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:48:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CE11474E44 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:48:10 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2OKmAub020171; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:48:11 -0500 (EST) +To: Oleg Lebedev +Cc: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +In-reply-to: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5A@postoffice.waterford.org> +References: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5A@postoffice.waterford.org> +Comments: In-reply-to Oleg Lebedev + message dated "Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:48:52 -0700" +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:48:10 -0500 +Message-ID: <20170.1048538890@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-27.9 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,UPPERCASE_25_50 autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/167 +X-Sequence-Number: 1465 + +Oleg Lebedev writes: +> SELECT * FROM media m +> WHERE m.mediatype =3D (SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE +> medianame=3D'Audio')=20 +> AND EXISTS=20 +> (SELECT * FROM=20 +> (SELECT objectid AS mediaid=20 +> FROM media=20 +> WHERE activity=3D'347667'=20 +> UNION=20 +> SELECT ism.media AS mediaid=20 +> FROM intsetmedia ism, set s=20 +> WHERE ism.set =3D s.objectid=20 +> AND s.activity=3D'347667' ) AS a1=20 +> WHERE a1.mediaid =3D m.objectid=20 +> LIMIT 1)=20 +> ORDER BY medianame ASC, status DESC=20 + +Well, one observation is that the LIMIT clause is useless and probably +counterproductive; EXISTS takes only one row from the subselect anyway. +Another is that the UNION is doing it the hard way; UNION implies doing +a duplicate-elimination step, which you don't need here. UNION ALL +would be a little quicker. But what I would do is split it into two +EXISTS: + +SELECT * FROM media m +WHERE m.mediatype = (SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE +medianame='Audio') +AND ( EXISTS(SELECT 1 + FROM media + WHERE activity='347667' + AND objectid = m.objectid) + OR EXISTS(SELECT 1 + FROM intsetmedia ism, set s + WHERE ism.set = s.objectid + AND s.activity='347667' + AND ism.media = m.objectid)) +ORDER BY medianame ASC, status DESC + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 16:42:42 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2F90476332 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:42:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: from Mail (mail.waterford.org [205.124.117.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD75476323 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:42:38 -0500 (EST) +Received: by Mail + with XWall v3.25 ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:42:40 -0700 +From: Oleg Lebedev +To: Tom Lane +Cc: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:46:09 -0700 +X-Assembled-By: XWall v3.25 +Message-ID: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5F@postoffice.waterford.org> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/mixed; + boundary="_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb" +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.6 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART,MIME_SUSPECT_NAME, + QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/168 +X-Sequence-Number: 1466 + +This is a multi part message in MIME format. + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + + +I just ran the query you sent me and attached the output of EXPLAIN +ANALYZE as TOMs_plan.txt +It did not speed up the query significantly. + +It always seemed to me that UNION is faster than OR, so I tried your +suggestion to use UNION ALL with the original query without +counter-productive LIMIT 1 in EXISTS clause. This reduced the cost of +the plan by 50%, but slowed down the query. Weird ... The plan is shown +in UNION_ALL_plan.txt + +AFAIK, the only change I've done since the time when the query took 3 +sec. to run was adding more indexes and increasing the size of data by +about 25%. It sounds kind of stupid, but I remember that adding indexes +sometimes slowed down my queries. I will try to drop all the indexes and +add them back again one by one. + +Any other ideas? + +Thanks. +Oleg + + + + +-----Original Message----- +From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]=20 +Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 1:48 PM +To: Oleg Lebedev +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow query + + +Oleg Lebedev writes: +> SELECT * FROM media m +> WHERE m.mediatype =3D3D (SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE=20 +> medianame=3D3D'Audio')=3D20 AND EXISTS=3D20 +> (SELECT * FROM=3D20 +> (SELECT objectid AS mediaid=3D20 +> FROM media=3D20 +> WHERE activity=3D3D'347667'=3D20 +> UNION=3D20 +> SELECT ism.media AS mediaid=3D20 +> FROM intsetmedia ism, set s=3D20 +> WHERE ism.set =3D3D s.objectid=3D20 +> AND s.activity=3D3D'347667' ) AS a1=3D20 +> WHERE a1.mediaid =3D3D m.objectid=3D20 +> LIMIT 1)=3D20 +> ORDER BY medianame ASC, status DESC=3D20 + +Well, one observation is that the LIMIT clause is useless and probably +counterproductive; EXISTS takes only one row from the subselect anyway. +Another is that the UNION is doing it the hard way; UNION implies doing +a duplicate-elimination step, which you don't need here. UNION ALL +would be a little quicker. But what I would do is split it into two +EXISTS: + +SELECT * FROM media m +WHERE m.mediatype =3D (SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE +medianame=3D'Audio')=20 +AND ( EXISTS(SELECT 1 + FROM media=20 + WHERE activity=3D'347667'=20 + AND objectid =3D m.objectid) + OR EXISTS(SELECT 1 + FROM intsetmedia ism, set s=20 + WHERE ism.set =3D s.objectid=20 + AND s.activity=3D'347667' + AND ism.media =3D m.objectid)) +ORDER BY medianame ASC, status DESC=20 + + regards, tom lane + + + +************************************* + +This email may contain privileged or confidential material intended for the= + named recipient only. +If you are not the named recipient, delete this message and all attachments= +.=20=20 +Any review, copying, printing, disclosure or other use is prohibited. +We reserve the right to monitor email sent through our network. + +************************************* + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: text/text; name="TOMs_plan.txt" +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="TOMs_plan.txt" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 + +VG9tJ3MgUXVlcnk6DQpTRUxFQ1QgKiBGUk9NIG1lZGlhIG0NCldIRVJFIG0u +bWVkaWF0eXBlID0gKFNFTEVDVCBvYmplY3RpZCBGUk9NIG1lZGlhdHlwZSBX +SEVSRQ0KbWVkaWFuYW1lPSdBdWRpbycpIA0KQU5EICggICBFWElTVFMoU0VM +RUNUIDENCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEZST00gbWVkaWEgDQogICAgICAgICAg +ICAgICBXSEVSRSBhY3Rpdml0eT0nMzQ3NjY3JyANCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAg +IEFORCBvYmplY3RpZCA9IG0ub2JqZWN0aWQpDQogICAgIE9SIEVYSVNUUyhT +RUxFQ1QgMQ0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgRlJPTSBpbnRzZXRtZWRpYSBpc20s +IHNldCBzIA0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgV0hFUkUgaXNtLnNldCA9IHMub2Jq +ZWN0aWQgDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICBBTkQgcy5hY3Rpdml0eT0nMzQ3NjY3 +Jw0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgQU5EIGlzbS5tZWRpYSA9IG0ub2JqZWN0aWQp +KQ0KT1JERVIgQlkgbWVkaWFuYW1lIEFTQywgc3RhdHVzIERFU0MgDQoNCg0K +VG9tJ3MgUVVFUlkgUExBTiANCiBTb3J0IChjb3N0PTU1MzY0MS40My4uNTUz +NjQ4LjgwIHJvd3M9Mjk0NSB3aWR0aD0yMTgpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0xMjYw +ODcuNzcuLjEyNjA4Ny44MCByb3dzPTI3IGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICBTb3J0IEtl +eTogbWVkaWFuYW1lLCBzdGF0dXMgDQogIEluaXRQbGFuIA0KICAtPiBTZXEg +U2NhbiBvbiBtZWRpYXR5cGUgKGNvc3Q9MC4wMC4uMS4yOSByb3dzPTEgd2lk +dGg9OCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMTIuLjAuMTQgcm93cz0xIGxvb3BzPTEp +IA0KICBGaWx0ZXI6IChtZWRpYW5hbWUgPSAnQXVkaW8nOjpjaGFyYWN0ZXIg +dmFyeWluZykgDQogIC0+IEluZGV4IFNjYW4gdXNpbmcgbWVkaWFfbXR5cGVf +aW5kZXggb24gbWVkaWEgbSAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi41NTM0NzEuNzQgcm93cz0y +OTQ1IHdpZHRoPTIxOCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTQ4NzAuNjUuLjEyNjA4Ny4w +NiByb3dzPTI3IGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICBJbmRleCBDb25kOiAobWVkaWF0eXBl +ID0gJDApIA0KICBGaWx0ZXI6ICgoc3VicGxhbikgT1IgKHN1YnBsYW4pKSAN +CiAgU3ViUGxhbiANCiAgLT4gSW5kZXggU2NhbiB1c2luZyBtZWRpYV9wa2V5 +IG9uIG1lZGlhIChjb3N0PTAuMDAuLjUuMTEgcm93cz0xIHdpZHRoPTApIChh +Y3R1YWwgdGltZT0wLjA0Li4wLjA0IHJvd3M9MCBsb29wcz00NDg3NikgDQog +IEluZGV4IENvbmQ6IChvYmplY3RpZCA9ICQxKSANCiAgRmlsdGVyOiAoYWN0 +aXZpdHkgPSAzNDc2Njc6OmJpZ2ludCkgDQogIC0+IEhhc2ggSm9pbiAoY29z +dD0yNC4yNS4uMTMzLjgwIHJvd3M9MSB3aWR0aD0xNikgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1l +PTIuNzEuLjIuNzEgcm93cz0wIGxvb3BzPTQ0ODUwKSANCiAgSGFzaCBDb25k +OiAoIm91dGVyIi4ic2V0IiA9ICJpbm5lciIub2JqZWN0aWQpIA0KICAtPiBJ +bmRleCBTY2FuIHVzaW5nIGludHNldG1lZGlhX21lZGlhX2luZGV4IG9uIGlu +dHNldG1lZGlhIGlzbSAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi4xMDkuMjYgcm93cz0zOCB3aWR0 +aD04KSAoYWN0dWFsIHRpbWU9MC4wNC4uMC4wNCByb3dzPTEgbG9vcHM9NDQ4 +NTApIA0KICBJbmRleCBDb25kOiAobWVkaWEgPSAkMSkgDQogIC0+IEhhc2gg +KGNvc3Q9MjQuMjQuLjI0LjI0IHJvd3M9NiB3aWR0aD04KSAoYWN0dWFsIHRp +bWU9MC4xNC4uMC4xNCByb3dzPTAgbG9vcHM9NDQ4NTApIA0KICAtPiBJbmRl +eCBTY2FuIHVzaW5nIHNldF9hY3RfaW5kZXggb24gInNldCIgcyAoY29zdD0w +LjAwLi4yNC4yNCByb3dzPTYgd2lkdGg9OCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMTEu +LjAuMTMgcm93cz0yIGxvb3BzPTQ0ODUwKSANCiAgSW5kZXggQ29uZDogKGFj +dGl2aXR5ID0gMzQ3NjY3OjpiaWdpbnQpIA0KIFRvdGFsIHJ1bnRpbWU6IDEy +NjA4OC4zMyBtc2VjIA0K + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: text/text; name="UNION_ALL_plan.txt" +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="UNION_ALL_plan.txt" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 + +TmV3IFF1ZXJ5Og0KU0VMRUNUICogRlJPTSBtZWRpYSBtIA0KV0hFUkUgbS5t +ZWRpYXR5cGUgPSAoU0VMRUNUIG9iamVjdGlkIEZST00gbWVkaWF0eXBlIFdI +RVJFIG1lZGlhbmFtZT0nQXVkaW8nKSANCkFORCBFWElTVFMgDQooU0VMRUNU +ICogRlJPTSANCihTRUxFQ1Qgb2JqZWN0aWQgQVMgbWVkaWFpZCANCkZST00g +bWVkaWEgDQpXSEVSRSBhY3Rpdml0eT0nMzQ3NjY3JyANClVOSU9OIEFMTCAN +ClNFTEVDVCBpc20ubWVkaWEgQVMgbWVkaWFpZCANCkZST00gaW50c2V0bWVk +aWEgaXNtLCBzZXQgcyANCldIRVJFIGlzbS5zZXQgPSBzLm9iamVjdGlkIA0K +QU5EIHMuYWN0aXZpdHk9JzM0NzY2NycgKSBBUyBhMSANCldIRVJFIGExLm1l +ZGlhaWQgPSBtLm9iamVjdGlkIA0KKSANCk9SREVSIEJZIG1lZGlhbmFtZSBB +U0MsIHN0YXR1cyBERVNDIA0KDQogDQpRVUVSWSBQTEFOOiANCiBTb3J0IChj +b3N0PTI4MDg1Mi44Ni4uMjgwODU3Ljc3IHJvd3M9MTk2MyB3aWR0aD0yMTgp +IChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0xMjkzNjAuNzIuLjEyOTM2MC43MyByb3dzPTI3IGxv +b3BzPTEpIA0KICBTb3J0IEtleTogbWVkaWFuYW1lLCBzdGF0dXMgDQogIElu +aXRQbGFuIA0KICAtPiBTZXEgU2NhbiBvbiBtZWRpYXR5cGUgKGNvc3Q9MC4w +MC4uMS4yOSByb3dzPTEgd2lkdGg9OCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMTMuLjAu +MTUgcm93cz0xIGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICBGaWx0ZXI6IChtZWRpYW5hbWUgPSAn +QXVkaW8nOjpjaGFyYWN0ZXIgdmFyeWluZykgDQogIC0+IEluZGV4IFNjYW4g +dXNpbmcgbWVkaWFfbXR5cGVfaW5kZXggb24gbWVkaWEgbSAoY29zdD0wLjAw +Li4yODA3NDUuNDggcm93cz0xOTYzIHdpZHRoPTIxOCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1l +PTU1MjMuODUuLjEyOTM1OS45NiByb3dzPTI3IGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICBJbmRl +eCBDb25kOiAobWVkaWF0eXBlID0gJDApIA0KICBGaWx0ZXI6IChzdWJwbGFu +KSANCiAgU3ViUGxhbiANCiAgLT4gU3VicXVlcnkgU2NhbiBhMSAoY29zdD0w +LjAwLi4xMzguOTEgcm93cz0yIHdpZHRoPTI0KSAoYWN0dWFsIHRpbWU9Mi44 +NC4uMi44NCByb3dzPTAgbG9vcHM9NDQ4NzYpIA0KICAtPiBBcHBlbmQgKGNv +c3Q9MC4wMC4uMTM4LjkxIHJvd3M9MiB3aWR0aD0yNCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1l +PTIuODQuLjIuODQgcm93cz0wIGxvb3BzPTQ0ODc2KSANCiAgLT4gU3VicXVl +cnkgU2NhbiAiKlNFTEVDVCogMSIgKGNvc3Q9MC4wMC4uNS4xMSByb3dzPTEg +d2lkdGg9OCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMDYuLjAuMDYgcm93cz0wIGxvb3Bz +PTQ0ODc2KSANCiAgLT4gSW5kZXggU2NhbiB1c2luZyBtZWRpYV9wa2V5IG9u +IG1lZGlhIChjb3N0PTAuMDAuLjUuMTEgcm93cz0xIHdpZHRoPTgpIChhY3R1 +YWwgdGltZT0wLjA0Li4wLjA0IHJvd3M9MCBsb29wcz00NDg3NikgDQogIElu +ZGV4IENvbmQ6IChvYmplY3RpZCA9ICQxKSANCiAgRmlsdGVyOiAoYWN0aXZp +dHkgPSAzNDc2Njc6OmJpZ2ludCkgDQogIC0+IFN1YnF1ZXJ5IFNjYW4gIipT +RUxFQ1QqIDIiIChjb3N0PTI0LjI1Li4xMzMuODAgcm93cz0xIHdpZHRoPTI0 +KSAoYWN0dWFsIHRpbWU9Mi43Ny4uMi43NyByb3dzPTAgbG9vcHM9NDQ4NTAp +IA0KICAtPiBIYXNoIEpvaW4gKGNvc3Q9MjQuMjUuLjEzMy44MCByb3dzPTEg +d2lkdGg9MjQpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0yLjc2Li4yLjc2IHJvd3M9MCBsb29w +cz00NDg1MCkgDQogIEhhc2ggQ29uZDogKCJvdXRlciIuInNldCIgPSAiaW5u +ZXIiLm9iamVjdGlkKSANCiAgLT4gSW5kZXggU2NhbiB1c2luZyBpbnRzZXRt +ZWRpYV9tZWRpYV9pbmRleCBvbiBpbnRzZXRtZWRpYSBpc20gKGNvc3Q9MC4w +MC4uMTA5LjI2IHJvd3M9Mzggd2lkdGg9MTYpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0wLjA0 +Li4wLjA0IHJvd3M9MSBsb29wcz00NDg1MCkgDQogIEluZGV4IENvbmQ6ICht +ZWRpYSA9ICQxKSANCiAgLT4gSGFzaCAoY29zdD0yNC4yNC4uMjQuMjQgcm93 +cz02IHdpZHRoPTgpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0wLjE0Li4wLjE0IHJvd3M9MCBs +b29wcz00NDg1MCkgDQogIC0+IEluZGV4IFNjYW4gdXNpbmcgc2V0X2FjdF9p +bmRleCBvbiAic2V0IiBzIChjb3N0PTAuMDAuLjI0LjI0IHJvd3M9NiB3aWR0 +aD04KSAoYWN0dWFsIHRpbWU9MC4xMS4uMC4xMiByb3dzPTIgbG9vcHM9NDQ4 +NTApIA0KICBJbmRleCBDb25kOiAoYWN0aXZpdHkgPSAzNDc2Njc6OmJpZ2lu +dCkgDQogVG90YWwgcnVudGltZTogMTI5MzYxLjM1IG1zZWMgDQo= + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 17:08:51 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB1364761C0 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:08:50 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7DEE475F09 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:08:48 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2OM8oub020750; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:08:50 -0500 (EST) +To: Oleg Lebedev +Cc: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +In-reply-to: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5F@postoffice.waterford.org> +References: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E5F@postoffice.waterford.org> +Comments: In-reply-to Oleg Lebedev + message dated "Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:46:09 -0700" +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:08:50 -0500 +Message-ID: <20749.1048543730@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/169 +X-Sequence-Number: 1467 + +Oleg Lebedev writes: +> I just ran the query you sent me and attached the output of EXPLAIN +> ANALYZE as TOMs_plan.txt +> It did not speed up the query significantly. + +Nope. I was hoping to see a faster-start plan, but given the number of +rows involved I guess it won't change its mind. You're going to have to +think about a more intelligent approach, rather than minor tweaks. + +One question: since objectid is evidently a primary key, why are you +doing a subselect for the first part? Wouldn't it give the same result +just to say "m.activity = '347667'" in the top-level WHERE? + +As for the second part, I think you'll have to try to rewrite it as a +join with the media table. + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 17:33:43 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDCE3476112 + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:33:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: from Mail (mail.waterford.org [205.124.117.40]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D176475F5F + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:33:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: by Mail + with XWall v3.25 ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:33:40 -0700 +From: Oleg Lebedev +To: Tom Lane +Cc: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" +Subject: Re: Slow query +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:37:10 -0700 +X-Assembled-By: XWall v3.25 +Message-ID: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273113E61@postoffice.waterford.org> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/mixed; + boundary="_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb" +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART,MIME_SUSPECT_NAME, + QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/170 +X-Sequence-Number: 1468 + +This is a multi part message in MIME format. + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +You are right. I rewrote the query using JOINs and it increased +performance from 123 sec. to 20msec. I betcha I screwed smth up, but I +list the rewritten query below anyways. I also attached the new plan. +Thank you. + +SELECT * FROM media m=20 +JOIN=20 +((SELECT objectid AS mediaid=20 +FROM media=20 +WHERE activity=3D'347667')=20 +UNION=20 +(SELECT ism.media AS mediaid=20 +FROM intsetmedia ism, set s=20 +WHERE ism.set =3D s.objectid=20 +AND s.activity=3D'347667' )) a1=20 +ON=20 +m.mediatype =3D (SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE medianame=3D'Audio')= +=20 +AND m.objectid=3Dmediaid=20 +ORDER BY medianame ASC, status DESC=20 + + + +-----Original Message----- +From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]=20 +Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 3:09 PM +To: Oleg Lebedev +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow query + + +Oleg Lebedev writes: +> I just ran the query you sent me and attached the output of EXPLAIN=20 +> ANALYZE as TOMs_plan.txt It did not speed up the query significantly. + +Nope. I was hoping to see a faster-start plan, but given the number of +rows involved I guess it won't change its mind. You're going to have to +think about a more intelligent approach, rather than minor tweaks. + +One question: since objectid is evidently a primary key, why are you +doing a subselect for the first part? Wouldn't it give the same result +just to say "m.activity =3D '347667'" in the top-level WHERE? + +As for the second part, I think you'll have to try to rewrite it as a +join with the media table. + + regards, tom lane + + + +************************************* + +This email may contain privileged or confidential material intended for the= + named recipient only. +If you are not the named recipient, delete this message and all attachments= +.=20=20 +Any review, copying, printing, disclosure or other use is prohibited. +We reserve the right to monitor email sent through our network. + +************************************* + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb +Content-Type: text/text; name="NEW_plan.txt" +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="NEW_plan.txt" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 + +TmV3IFF1ZXJ5Og0KU0VMRUNUICogRlJPTSBtZWRpYSBtIA0KSk9JTiANCigo +U0VMRUNUIG9iamVjdGlkIEFTIG1lZGlhaWQgDQpGUk9NIG1lZGlhIA0KV0hF +UkUgYWN0aXZpdHk9JzM0NzY2NycpIA0KVU5JT04gDQooU0VMRUNUIGlzbS5t +ZWRpYSBBUyBtZWRpYWlkIA0KRlJPTSBpbnRzZXRtZWRpYSBpc20sIHNldCBz +IA0KV0hFUkUgaXNtLnNldCA9IHMub2JqZWN0aWQgDQpBTkQgcy5hY3Rpdml0 +eT0nMzQ3NjY3JyApKSBhMSANCk9OIA0KbS5tZWRpYXR5cGUgPSAoU0VMRUNU +IG9iamVjdGlkIEZST00gbWVkaWF0eXBlIFdIRVJFIG1lZGlhbmFtZT0nQXVk +aW8nKSANCkFORCBtLm9iamVjdGlkPW1lZGlhaWQgDQpPUkRFUiBCWSBtZWRp +YW5hbWUgQVNDLCBzdGF0dXMgREVTQyANCg0KIA0KUVVFUlkgUExBTiANCiBT +b3J0IChjb3N0PTE4MzEuNDcuLjE4MzEuNDcgcm93cz0xIHdpZHRoPTIyNSkg +KGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTE5LjU2Li4xOS41OCByb3dzPTI3IGxvb3BzPTEpIA0K +ICBTb3J0IEtleTogbS5tZWRpYW5hbWUsIG0uc3RhdHVzIA0KICBJbml0UGxh +biANCiAgLT4gU2VxIFNjYW4gb24gbWVkaWF0eXBlIChjb3N0PTAuMDAuLjEu +Mjkgcm93cz0xIHdpZHRoPTgpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0wLjEwLi4wLjEyIHJv +d3M9MSBsb29wcz0xKSANCiAgRmlsdGVyOiAobWVkaWFuYW1lID0gJ0F1ZGlv +Jzo6Y2hhcmFjdGVyIHZhcnlpbmcpIA0KICAtPiBOZXN0ZWQgTG9vcCAoY29z +dD0xNzAyLjk3Li4xODMxLjQ2IHJvd3M9MSB3aWR0aD0yMjUpIChhY3R1YWwg +dGltZT0xNi40NC4uMTguOTMgcm93cz0yNyBsb29wcz0xKSANCiAgLT4gU3Vi +cXVlcnkgU2NhbiBhMSAoY29zdD0xNzAyLjk3Li4xNzA0LjE5IHJvd3M9MjQg +d2lkdGg9MjQpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0xNi4xMC4uMTYuNzIgcm93cz01OCBs +b29wcz0xKSANCiAgLT4gVW5pcXVlIChjb3N0PTE3MDIuOTcuLjE3MDQuMTkg +cm93cz0yNCB3aWR0aD0yNCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTE2LjA4Li4xNi41NiBy +b3dzPTU4IGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICAtPiBTb3J0IChjb3N0PTE3MDIuOTcuLjE3 +MDMuNTggcm93cz0yNDMgd2lkdGg9MjQpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0xNi4wOC4u +MTYuMjUgcm93cz0yNjQgbG9vcHM9MSkgDQogIFNvcnQgS2V5OiBtZWRpYWlk +IA0KICAtPiBBcHBlbmQgKGNvc3Q9MC4wMC4uMTY5My4zMiByb3dzPTI0MyB3 +aWR0aD0yNCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMDcuLjkuMTEgcm93cz0yNjQgbG9v +cHM9MSkgDQogIC0+IFN1YnF1ZXJ5IFNjYW4gIipTRUxFQ1QqIDEiIChjb3N0 +PTAuMDAuLjUwNS43NiByb3dzPTE2OSB3aWR0aD04KSAoYWN0dWFsIHRpbWU9 +MC4wNi4uMC42NSByb3dzPTU1IGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICAtPiBJbmRleCBTY2Fu +IHVzaW5nIG1lZGlhX2FjdF9pbmRleCBvbiBtZWRpYSAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi41 +MDUuNzYgcm93cz0xNjkgd2lkdGg9OCkgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMDYuLjAu +NTMgcm93cz01NSBsb29wcz0xKSANCiAgSW5kZXggQ29uZDogKGFjdGl2aXR5 +ID0gMzQ3NjY3OjpiaWdpbnQpIA0KICAtPiBTdWJxdWVyeSBTY2FuICIqU0VM +RUNUKiAyIiAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi4xMTg3LjU3IHJvd3M9NzUgd2lkdGg9MjQp +IChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0wLjExLi44LjExIHJvd3M9MjA5IGxvb3BzPTEpIA0K +ICAtPiBOZXN0ZWQgTG9vcCAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi4xMTg3LjU3IHJvd3M9NzUg +d2lkdGg9MjQpIChhY3R1YWwgdGltZT0wLjEwLi43LjY4IHJvd3M9MjA5IGxv +b3BzPTEpIA0KICAtPiBJbmRleCBTY2FuIHVzaW5nIHNldF9hY3RfaW5kZXgg +b24gInNldCIgcyAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi4yNC4yMyByb3dzPTYgd2lkdGg9OCkg +KGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMDUuLjAuMDYgcm93cz0yIGxvb3BzPTEpIA0KICBJ +bmRleCBDb25kOiAoYWN0aXZpdHkgPSAzNDc2Njc6OmJpZ2ludCkgDQogIC0+ +IEluZGV4IFNjYW4gdXNpbmcgaW50c2V0bWVkaWFfc2V0X2luZGV4IG9uIGlu +dHNldG1lZGlhIGlzbSAoY29zdD0wLjAwLi4yMDMuNDIgcm93cz02OCB3aWR0 +aD0xNikgKGFjdHVhbCB0aW1lPTAuMDQuLjMuNTYgcm93cz0xMDQgbG9vcHM9 +MikgDQogIEluZGV4IENvbmQ6IChpc20uInNldCIgPSAib3V0ZXIiLm9iamVj +dGlkKSANCiAgLT4gSW5kZXggU2NhbiB1c2luZyBtZWRpYV9wa2V5IG9uIG1l +ZGlhIG0gKGNvc3Q9MC4wMC4uNS4yMiByb3dzPTEgd2lkdGg9MjE3KSAoYWN0 +dWFsIHRpbWU9MC4wMy4uMC4wMyByb3dzPTAgbG9vcHM9NTgpIA0KICBJbmRl +eCBDb25kOiAobS5vYmplY3RpZCA9ICJvdXRlciIubWVkaWFpZCkgDQogIEZp +bHRlcjogKG1lZGlhdHlwZSA9ICQwKSANCiBUb3RhbCBydW50aW1lOiAyMC4z +NiBtc2VjIA0K + +--_NextPart_1_qmZrHLajoetbkwlTZTViemHPfyb-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 24 22:26:56 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8586C475FBA + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 22:26:55 -0500 (EST) +Received: from c001.snv.cp.net (h024.c001.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.139]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9E47E475F5F + for ; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 22:26:54 -0500 (EST) +Received: (cpmta 21322 invoked from network); 24 Mar 2003 19:26:58 -0800 +Received: from 209.228.32.137 (HELO mail.dilger.cc.criticalpath.net) + by smtp.register-admin.com (209.228.32.139) with SMTP; + 24 Mar 2003 19:26:58 -0800 +X-Sent: 25 Mar 2003 03:26:58 GMT +Received: from [216.68.146.219] by mail.dilger.cc with HTTP; + Mon, 24 Mar 2003 19:26:57 -0800 (PST) +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 +Content-Disposition: inline +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: oleg.lebedev@waterford.org +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +From: "Nikolaus Dilger" +Subject: Re: Slow query +X-Sent-From: nikolaus@dilger.cc +Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 19:26:57 -0800 (PST) +X-Mailer: Web Mail 5.2.3-0_sol28 +Message-Id: <20030324192658.6612.h022.c001.wm@mail.dilger.cc.criticalpath.net> +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-13.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/171 +X-Sequence-Number: 1469 + +Oleg, + +My guess is that the query runs slow because by adding +data you exceeded what your database can do in memory +and you need to do some kind of disk sort. + +How about rewriting your query without the UNION and +the EXISTS to something like + +SELECT * FROM media m +WHERE m.mediatype =3D (SELECT objectid FROM mediatype=20 + WHERE medianame=3D'Audio') +AND ( m.activity=3D'347667' + OR m.objectid IN ( + SELECT s.objectid + FROM intsetmedia ism, set s + WHERE ism.set =3D s.objectid + AND s.activity=3D'347667')) +ORDER BY medianame ASC, status DESC + +Regards, +Nikolaus Dilger + +On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Oleg Lebedev wrote: + + +Message + + + +Please help me speed=20 +up the following query. It used to run in 2-5 sec., but +now it takes 2-3=20 +mins! +I ran VACUUM FULL=20 +ANALYZE and REINDEX. +SELECT * FROM media=20 +m +WHERE m.mediatype =3D=20 +(SELECT objectid FROM mediatype WHERE +medianame=3D'Audio')=20 +AND EXISTS=20 + +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 (SELECT * FROM=20 + +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 +(SELECT objectid AS mediaid=20 +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 +FROM media=20 +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 +WHERE activity=3D'347667'=20 +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 +UNION=20 +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 +SELECT ism.media AS mediaid=20 +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 +FROM intsetmedia ism, set s=20 +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 +WHERE ism.set =3D s.objectid=20 +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 +AND s.activity=3D'347667' ) AS a1=20 +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 WHERE a1.mediaid =3D m.objectid=20 + +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 LIMIT 1)=20 +ORDER BY medianame ASC, status DESC=20 +=A0 +Basically it tries=20 +to find all Audios that are either explicitly attached +to the given activity, or=20 +attached to the given activity via a many-to-many +relationship intsetmedia which=20 +links records in table Interaction, Set, and Media. +I attached the=20 +output of EXPLAIN and schemas and indexes on the tables +involved. Most of the=20 +fields are not relevant to the query, but I listed them +anyways. I discarded=20 +trigger information, though. +Thanks for your=20 +help. +=A0 +Oleg + +************************************* + +This email may contain privileged or confidential +material intended for the named recipient only. +If you are not the named recipient, delete this message +and all attachments.=20=20 +Any review, copying, printing, disclosure or other use +is prohibited. +We reserve the right to monitor email sent through our +network. + +************************************* + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 25 08:12:32 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0371474E5C + for ; + Tue, 25 Mar 2003 08:12:31 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail.libertyrms.com (unknown [209.167.124.227]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA616474E44 + for ; + Tue, 25 Mar 2003 08:12:30 -0500 (EST) +Received: from andrew by mail.libertyrms.com with local (Exim 3.22 #3 + (Debian)) + id 18xoEE-0005Pk-00 + for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 08:12:34 -0500 +Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 08:12:34 -0500 +From: Andrew Sullivan +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Finding the PID keeping a transaction open +Message-ID: <20030325081233.B18817@mail.libertyrms.com> +Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-12.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_10,USER_AGENT_MUTT + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/172 +X-Sequence-Number: 1470 + +Hi, + +Using 7.2.3 and 7.2.4 (the last .3 is being retired this weekend). + +I'm struggling with an application which is keeping open a +transaction (or, likely from the results, more than one) against a +pair of frequently-updated tables. Unfortunately, the +frequently-updated tables are also a performance bottleneck. + +These tables are small, but their physical size is very large, +because of all the updates. + +The problem is, of course, that vacuum isn't working because +_something_ is holding open the transaction. But I can't tell what. + +We connect to the database via JDBC; we have a pool which recycles +its connections. In the next version of the pool, the autocommit +foolishness (end transaction and issue immediate BEGIN) is gone, but +that won't help me in the case at hand. + +What I'm trying to figure out is whether there is a way to learn +which pids are responsible for the long-running transaction(s) that +touch(es) the candidate tables. Then I can find a way of paring those +processes back, so that I can get vacuum to succeed. + +I think there must be a way with gdb, but I'm stumped. Any +suggestions? The time a process has been living is not a guide, +because the connections (and hence processes) get recycled in the +pool. + +A +-- +---- +Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street +Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada + M2P 2A8 + +1 416 646 3304 x110 + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 25 09:37:40 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C72F8475A71 + for ; + Tue, 25 Mar 2003 09:37:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0887B474E44 + for ; + Tue, 25 Mar 2003 09:37:39 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2PEbfub028391; + Tue, 25 Mar 2003 09:37:42 -0500 (EST) +To: Andrew Sullivan +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Finding the PID keeping a transaction open +In-reply-to: <20030325081233.B18817@mail.libertyrms.com> +References: <20030325081233.B18817@mail.libertyrms.com> +Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Sullivan + message dated "Tue, 25 Mar 2003 08:12:34 -0500" +Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 09:37:41 -0500 +Message-ID: <28390.1048603061@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/173 +X-Sequence-Number: 1471 + +Andrew Sullivan writes: +> What I'm trying to figure out is whether there is a way to learn +> which pids are responsible for the long-running transaction(s) that +> touch(es) the candidate tables. + +In 7.3 you could look at the pg_locks system view, but I can't think +of any reasonable way to do it in 7.2 :-( + +> I think there must be a way with gdb, but I'm stumped. + +The lock structures are arcane enough that manual examination with gdb +would take many minutes --- which you'd have to do with the LockMgr lock +held to keep them from changing underneath you. This seems quite +unworkable for a production database ... + +It's conceivable that some version of the pg_locks code could be +back-ported to 7.2 --- you'd have to settle for dumping the info to +the log, probably, due to lack of table-function support, but it +could be done. + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 25 10:30:48 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B86E6475A71 + for ; + Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:30:46 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail.libertyrms.com (unknown [209.167.124.227]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B204474E44 + for ; + Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:30:45 -0500 (EST) +Received: from andrew by mail.libertyrms.com with local (Exim 3.22 #3 + (Debian)) + id 18xqO1-0007RP-00 + for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:30:49 -0500 +Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:30:49 -0500 +From: Andrew Sullivan +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Finding the PID keeping a transaction open +Message-ID: <20030325103049.A28249@mail.libertyrms.com> +Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +References: <20030325081233.B18817@mail.libertyrms.com> + <28390.1048603061@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i +In-Reply-To: <28390.1048603061@sss.pgh.pa.us>; + from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us on Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 09:37:41AM -0500 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MUTT + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/174 +X-Sequence-Number: 1472 + +On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 09:37:41AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: +> In 7.3 you could look at the pg_locks system view, but I can't think +> of any reasonable way to do it in 7.2 :-( + +Thanks. I was afraid you'd say that. Rats. + +> would take many minutes --- which you'd have to do with the LockMgr lock +> held to keep them from changing underneath you. This seems quite + +Well, then, _that's_ a non-starter. Ugh. + +> It's conceivable that some version of the pg_locks code could be +> back-ported to 7.2 --- you'd have to settle for dumping the info to +> the log, probably, due to lack of table-function support, but it +> could be done. + +I think it's probably better just to work on making the whole thing +work correctly with 7.3, instead. I'm keen to move it, and 7.3 seems +stable enough, so I'm inclined just to move that up in priority. + +Thanks, +A + +-- +---- +Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street +Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada + M2P 2A8 + +1 416 646 3304 x110 + + +From dharana@gamersmafia.com Tue Mar 25 21:34:06 2003 +Received: from unknown (HELO gamersmafia.com) (80.38.119.191) + by 0 with SMTP; 25 Mar 2003 20:34:05 -0000 +Message-ID: <3E80BCBE.3000205@gamersmafia.com> +Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 21:31:58 +0100 +From: dharana +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; + rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: What's better: one huge database or several smaller ones? +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= version=2.20 +X-Spam-Level: + +I'm planning to develop a website network with n network nodes. There +will be a central node (website) wich will summarize information from +all the network nodes. It will be also possible to use data between +nodes (node A showing own data + data from node B). Table structures +between nodes will be identical. So my question is: what should i do, +put all the data in one huge database or spread it in several nearly +identical databases? + +Data generated will grow at a rate of ~ 250Mb/year; 10000 rows per table +(size is physical space of /var/lib/postgres/data after vacuum analyze, +this dir contains only one database). + +Thank you in advance, + +dharana + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Tue Mar 25 15:32:07 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0388747610A + for ; + Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:32:06 -0500 (EST) +Received: from 4unrealers.com (unknown [217.172.66.233]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 105C0475F26 + for ; + Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:32:04 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 16667 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2003 20:34:05 -0000 +Message-Id: <20030325203204.105C0475F26@postgresql.org> +Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:32:04 -0500 (EST) +From: dharana@gamersmafia.com +To: undisclosed-recipients: ; +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.7 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,MSG_ID_ADDED_BY_MTA_3,NO_REAL_NAME version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/175 +X-Sequence-Number: 1473 + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 26 09:17:51 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A44BD475F00 + for ; + Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:17:50 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sabre.velocet.net (sabre.velocet.net [216.138.209.205]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04A88475CBC + for ; + Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:17:46 -0500 (EST) +Received: from stark.dyndns.tv (H162.C233.tor.velocet.net [216.138.233.162]) + by sabre.velocet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 3033D1384F9; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:17:48 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=stark.dyndns.tv ident=foobar) + by stark.dyndns.tv with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) + id 18yBit-0001FJ-00; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:17:47 -0500 +To: bsamwel@xs4all.nl +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Adding a foreign key constraint is extremely slow +References: <20505.194.109.187.67.1048442304.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> +In-Reply-To: <20505.194.109.187.67.1048442304.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> +From: Greg Stark +Organization: The Emacs Conspiracy; member since 1992 +Date: 26 Mar 2003 09:17:47 -0500 +Message-ID: <874r5qmctw.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Lines: 19 +User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.8 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_GNUS_UA + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/177 +X-Sequence-Number: 1475 + +bsamwel@xs4all.nl writes: + +> alter table triples add foreign key(id1) references wwwlog(id); +> +> PostgreSQL starts doing heavy work for at least one and a half hour, and I +> broke it off at that. It is not possible to "explain" a statement like +> this! Probably what it does is that it will check the foreign key +> constraint for every field in the table. This will make it completely +> impossible to load my data, because: +> +> (2) I cannot set the foreign key constraints AFTER loading the 0.9 million +> records because I've got no clue at all how long this operation is going +> to take. + +Try adding an index on wwwlog(id) so that it can check the constraint without +doing a full table scan for each value being checked. + +-- +greg + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 26 12:08:59 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F97947631A + for ; + Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:08:57 -0500 (EST) +Received: from smtpzilla5.xs4all.nl (smtpzilla5.xs4all.nl [194.109.127.141]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EEA4476332 + for ; + Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:08:54 -0500 (EST) +Received: from liacs.nl (zappa.liacs.nl [132.229.137.201]) + by smtpzilla5.xs4all.nl (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id h2QH8r0j049051; + Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:08:56 +0100 (CET) +Message-ID: <3E81DEA3.7060305@liacs.nl> +Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:08:51 +0100 +From: Bart Samwel +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; + rv:1.3) Gecko/20030316 Debian/1.3-1 +X-Accept-Language: en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Greg Stark +Cc: bsamwel@xs4all.nl, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Adding a foreign key constraint is extremely slow +References: <20505.194.109.187.67.1048442304.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> + <874r5qmctw.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +In-Reply-To: <874r5qmctw.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-34.8 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/178 +X-Sequence-Number: 1476 + +Greg Stark wrote: +> bsamwel@xs4all.nl writes: +> +> +>>alter table triples add foreign key(id1) references wwwlog(id); +>> +>>PostgreSQL starts doing heavy work for at least one and a half hour, and I +>>broke it off at that. It is not possible to "explain" a statement like +>>this! Probably what it does is that it will check the foreign key +>>constraint for every field in the table. This will make it completely +>>impossible to load my data, because: +>> +>>(2) I cannot set the foreign key constraints AFTER loading the 0.9 million +>>records because I've got no clue at all how long this operation is going +>>to take. +> +> +> Try adding an index on wwwlog(id) so that it can check the constraint without +> doing a full table scan for each value being checked. + +AFAIK, because wwwlog(id) is the primary key, this index already exists +implicitly. Still, 0.9 million separate index lookups are too slow for +my purposes, if for example it takes something as low as 1 ms per lookup +it will still take 900 seconds (= 15 minutes) to complete. As the +complete adding of the foreign key constraint took about an hour, that +would suggest an average of 4 ms per lookup, which suggests that the +index is, in fact, present. :) + +Anyway, I've actually waited for the operation to complete. The problem +is out of my way for now. + +Bart + + +-- + +Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (http://www.liacs.nl) +E-mail: bsamwel@liacs.nl Telephone: +31-71-5277037 +Homepage: http://www.liacs.nl/~bsamwel +Opinions stated in this e-mail are mine and not necessarily my employer's. + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Wed Mar 26 05:52:14 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A5B3475CBC + for ; + Wed, 26 Mar 2003 05:52:12 -0500 (EST) +Received: from khyber.enigma (mail.dpsl.net [202.144.16.187]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E68BC474E44 + for ; + Wed, 26 Mar 2003 05:52:09 -0500 (EST) +Received: by mail.dpsl.net with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) + id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 16:23:18 +0530 +Received: from khyber.enigma (mail.dpsl.net [202.144.16.187]) by khyber.enigma + with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version + 5.5.2653.13) id HPB84PWV; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 16:23:12 +0530 +Received: FROM comp158 BY khyber.enigma ; Wed Mar 26 16:23:11 2003 +0500 +From: Abhishek Sharma +Reply-To: Abhishek Sharma +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: +Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 16:26:01 -0800 +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 (Normal) +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) +Importance: Normal +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_30,DATE_IN_FUTURE_12_24,MSGID_GOOD_EXCHANGE + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/176 +X-Sequence-Number: 1474 + +subscribe + +end + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 27 11:58:05 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9EC1474E44 + for ; + Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:58:02 -0500 (EST) +Received: from wbs01.dbasetek.com (host210.dbasetek.com [66.134.187.210]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26DB476331 + for ; + Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:57:57 -0500 (EST) +Received: from dbasetek.com (lt001.dbasetek.com [192.168.1.58]) + by wbs01.dbasetek.com (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h2RGw2C27472 + for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:58:02 -0600 +Message-ID: <3E832DA0.9010604@dbasetek.com> +Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:58:08 -0600 +From: Robert D Oden +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; + rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: max_fsm settings +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/179 +X-Sequence-Number: 1477 + +I have not been able to find any documentation on how to determine the +proper settings for the max_fsm_relations and the max_fsm_pages config +options. Any help would be appreciated. + +Thanks + +Doug Oden + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Thu Mar 27 16:11:00 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE2C947580B + for ; + Thu, 27 Mar 2003 16:10:59 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [65.217.53.66]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AFCD476241 + for ; + Thu, 27 Mar 2003 16:10:28 -0500 (EST) +Received: from thorn.mmrd.com (thorn.mmrd.com [172.25.10.100]) + by localhost.localdomain (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h2RLjn6P019154; + Thu, 27 Mar 2003 16:45:50 -0500 +Received: from gnvex001.mmrd.com (gnvex001.mmrd.com [192.168.3.55]) + by thorn.mmrd.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2RLALp09124; + Thu, 27 Mar 2003 16:10:23 -0500 +Received: from camel.mmrd.com ([172.25.5.213]) by gnvex001.mmrd.com with SMTP + (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) + id F3HTK9R7; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 16:10:20 -0500 +Subject: Re: max_fsm settings +From: Robert Treat +To: Robert D Oden +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +In-Reply-To: <3E832DA0.9010604@dbasetek.com> +References: <3E832DA0.9010604@dbasetek.com> +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 +Date: 27 Mar 2003 16:10:21 -0500 +Message-Id: <1048799421.13798.1337.camel@camel> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_XIMIAN + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/180 +X-Sequence-Number: 1478 + +The mail archives are a wonderful place, check out this thread and the +discussion that followed. +http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1360953 + +Robert Treat + +On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 11:58, Robert D Oden wrote: +> I have not been able to find any documentation on how to determine the +> proper settings for the max_fsm_relations and the max_fsm_pages config +> options. Any help would be appreciated. +> +> Thanks +> +> Doug Oden + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 28 10:42:50 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD42D475ED4 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 10:42:49 -0500 (EST) +Received: from geek.artcobell.com (unknown [63.114.209.181]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F19C475E77 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 10:42:48 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 15788 invoked from network); 28 Mar 2003 15:38:52 -0000 +Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (127.0.0.1) + by localhost.uu.net with SMTP; 28 Mar 2003 15:38:52 -0000 +From: Jeremiah Elliott +Reply-To: jelliott@artcobell.com +Organization: Artco-Bell Corp. +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: slow query - where not in +Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 09:38:50 -0600 +User-Agent: KMail/1.5 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Disposition: inline +Message-Id: <200303280938.50382.jelliott@artcobell.com> +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_10,USER_AGENT + version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/181 +X-Sequence-Number: 1479 + +here is the query that is killing me: + +select shoporder from sodetailtabletrans where shoporder not in(select +shoporder from soheadertable) + +This is just an example query. Any time I use 'where not in(' it takes several +hours to return a resultset. The postgres version is 7.2.3 although I have +tried it on my test server which has 7.3 on it and it runs just as slow. The +server is a fast server 2GHz with a gig of ram. I have tried several +differant index setups but nothing seems to help. + +soheadertable - 5104 rows +CREATE TABLE "soheadertable" ( + "shoporder" numeric(10,0) NOT NULL, + "initrundate" date, + "actualrundate" date, + "processedminutes" numeric(10,0), + "starttime" timestamptz, + "endtime" timestamptz, + "line" int4, + "personcount" numeric(10,0), + "product" varchar(15), + "qtytomake" numeric(10,3), + "linestatus" numeric(2,0) DEFAULT 1, + "finishlinestatus" numeric(2,0) DEFAULT 1, + "qtyinqueue" numeric(10,3), + "lastcartonprinted" numeric(10,0), + "qtydone" int8, + "warehouse" text, + "rescheduledate" date, + "calculateddatetorun" date +); +CREATE UNIQUE INDEX "shoporder_soheadertable_ukey" ON "soheadertable" +("shoporder"); + +sodetailtabletrans - 31494 rows +CREATE TABLE "sodetailtabletrans" ( + "shoporder" numeric(10,0) NOT NULL, + "soseq" numeric(5,0) NOT NULL, + "product" char(15) NOT NULL, + "qtyqueued" numeric(17,2), + "qtyneeded" numeric(17,2), + "qtyallocated" numeric(17,2), + "qtyused" numeric(17,2), + "linestatus" numeric(2,0) DEFAULT 1, + "unitsperenditem" numeric(10,1), + CONSTRAINT "sodetailtrans_pk" PRIMARY KEY ("shoporder", "soseq") + +-Jeremiah Elliott +jelliott@artcobell.com +); + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 28 10:59:56 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17DD0475ED4 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 10:59:55 -0500 (EST) +Received: from wolff.to (wolff.to [66.93.249.74]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 697AD475E77 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 10:59:54 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 10916 invoked by uid 500); 28 Mar 2003 15:59:33 -0000 +Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 09:59:33 -0600 +From: Bruno Wolff III +To: Jeremiah Elliott +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: slow query - where not in +Message-ID: <20030328155933.GA10761@wolff.to> +Mail-Followup-To: Jeremiah Elliott , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +References: <200303280938.50382.jelliott@artcobell.com> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <200303280938.50382.jelliott@artcobell.com> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MUTT + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/182 +X-Sequence-Number: 1480 + +On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 09:38:50 -0600, + Jeremiah Elliott wrote: +> here is the query that is killing me: +> +> select shoporder from sodetailtabletrans where shoporder not in(select +> shoporder from soheadertable) + +This will probably work better in 7.4. + +For now there are several ways to rewrite this query. + +If there are no null values for shoporder in soheadertable or +sodetailtabletrans you can use not exists instead of not in: +select shoporder from sodetailtabletrans where shoporder not exists(select +shoporder from soheadertable) + +You can use set difference to calculate the result: +select shoporder from sodetailtabletrans except all select +shoporder from soheadertable + +If there are no null values for shoporder in one of sodetailtabletrans +or soheadertable you can user an outer join with a restriction that limits +the rows of interest to those that don't match: +select sodetailtabletrans.shoporder from sodetailtabletrans left join +soheadertable using (shoporder) where soheadertable.shoporder is null + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 28 11:20:31 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73B10476356 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:20:30 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sabre.velocet.net (sabre.velocet.net [216.138.209.205]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C122747634B + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:20:29 -0500 (EST) +Received: from stark.dyndns.tv (H162.C233.tor.velocet.net [216.138.233.162]) + by sabre.velocet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 3E9611381D8; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:20:32 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=stark.dyndns.tv ident=foobar) + by stark.dyndns.tv with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) + id 18ywal-0005W4-00; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:20:31 -0500 +To: jelliott@artcobell.com +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: slow query - where not in +References: <200303280938.50382.jelliott@artcobell.com> +In-Reply-To: <200303280938.50382.jelliott@artcobell.com> +From: Greg Stark +Organization: The Emacs Conspiracy; member since 1992 +Date: 28 Mar 2003 11:20:29 -0500 +Message-ID: <87u1dn31ki.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> +Lines: 36 +User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.8 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_GNUS_UA + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/183 +X-Sequence-Number: 1481 + +Jeremiah Elliott writes: + +> here is the query that is killing me: +> +> select shoporder from sodetailtabletrans where shoporder not in(select +> shoporder from soheadertable) +> +> This is just an example query. Any time I use 'where not in(' it takes several +> hours to return a resultset. The postgres version is 7.2.3 although I have +> tried it on my test server which has 7.3 on it and it runs just as slow. The +> server is a fast server 2GHz with a gig of ram. I have tried several +> differant index setups but nothing seems to help. + +This should be improved with 7.4, however there are some other things you can +try now. + +try + +SELECT shoporder + FROM sodetailtabletrans + WHERE NOT EXISTS ( + SELECT 1 + FROM soheadertable + WHERE shoporder = sodetailtabletrans.shoporder + ) + +or else try something like + + SELECT a.shoporder + FROM sodetailtabletrans as a +LEFT OUTER JOIN soheadertable as b ON (a.shoporder = b.shoporder) + WHERE b.shoporder IS NULL + + +-- +greg + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 28 11:50:10 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B078E475E77 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:50:09 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8527447580B + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:50:08 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 6682 invoked by uid 65534); 28 Mar 2003 16:50:12 -0000 +Received: from chello062178186201.1.15.tuwien.teleweb.at (EHLO beeblebrox) + (62.178.186.201) + by mail.gmx.net (mp014-rz3) with SMTP; 28 Mar 2003 17:50:12 +0100 +Message-ID: <028e01c2f54a$9af3d010$3201a8c0@beeblebrox> +From: "Michael Paesold" +To: "Bruno Wolff III" , + "Jeremiah Elliott" +Cc: +References: <200303280938.50382.jelliott@artcobell.com> + <20030328155933.GA10761@wolff.to> +Subject: Re: slow query - where not in +Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 17:53:46 +0100 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Priority: 3 +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 +X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-25.8 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_20,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/184 +X-Sequence-Number: 1482 + +Bruno Wolff III wrote: + +> Jeremiah Elliott wrote: +> > here is the query that is killing me: +> > +> > select shoporder from sodetailtabletrans where shoporder not in(select +> > shoporder from soheadertable) +> + +> If there are no null values for shoporder in soheadertable or +> sodetailtabletrans you can use not exists instead of not in: +> select shoporder from sodetailtabletrans where shoporder not exists(select +> shoporder from soheadertable) + +I think this should rather be: + +SELECT shoporder FROM sodetailtabletrans + WHERE NOT EXISTS ( + SELECT 1 FROM soheadertable + WHERE soheadertable.shoporder = sodetailtabletrans.shoporder + ) + +Regards, +Michael Paesold + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 28 12:04:49 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FDB7475ED4 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 12:04:46 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mescalin.tbi.univie.ac.at (mescalin.tbi.univie.ac.at + [131.130.44.61]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73EC1475E91 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 12:04:42 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost (ulim@localhost) + by mescalin.tbi.univie.ac.at (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h2SH4l505287 + for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:04:47 +0100 +Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:04:47 +0100 (CET) +From: Ulli Mueckstein +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: calling analyze from a stored procedure in C +Message-ID: + +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-12.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,USER_AGENT_PINE + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/185 +X-Sequence-Number: 1483 + +Hi everybody! + +I have to insert a lot of data (more than 1.000.000 rows) in various +tables. I use stored procedures in C to insert the data. It is necessary +to run ANALYZE after inserting a few thousand rows into a table. Can someone +tell me how to call ANALYZE (or analyze_rel(Oid relid, VacuumStmt *vacstmt)) +from a C stored procedure ? Any help would be appreciated. + +Thanks + +Ulli Mueckstein + +-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 28 12:54:19 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A99475E77 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 12:54:17 -0500 (EST) +Received: from wolff.to (wolff.to [66.93.249.74]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 28FA347580B + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 12:54:16 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 12758 invoked by uid 500); 28 Mar 2003 17:53:56 -0000 +Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:53:56 -0600 +From: Bruno Wolff III +To: Michael Paesold +Cc: Jeremiah Elliott , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: slow query - where not in +Message-ID: <20030328175356.GA12549@wolff.to> +Mail-Followup-To: Michael Paesold , + Jeremiah Elliott , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +References: <200303280938.50382.jelliott@artcobell.com> + <20030328155933.GA10761@wolff.to> + <028e01c2f54a$9af3d010$3201a8c0@beeblebrox> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <028e01c2f54a$9af3d010$3201a8c0@beeblebrox> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MUTT + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/186 +X-Sequence-Number: 1484 + +On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 17:53:46 +0100, + Michael Paesold wrote: +> Bruno Wolff III wrote: +> +> I think this should rather be: +> +> SELECT shoporder FROM sodetailtabletrans +> WHERE NOT EXISTS ( +> SELECT 1 FROM soheadertable +> WHERE soheadertable.shoporder = sodetailtabletrans.shoporder +> ) + +Thanks for catching my mistake. + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Fri Mar 28 16:03:34 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8141A475C3D + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 16:03:33 -0500 (EST) +Received: from geek.artcobell.com (unknown [63.114.209.181]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1748C475458 + for ; + Fri, 28 Mar 2003 16:03:30 -0500 (EST) +Received: (qmail 18609 invoked from network); 28 Mar 2003 20:58:58 -0000 +Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (127.0.0.1) + by localhost.uu.net with SMTP; 28 Mar 2003 20:58:58 -0000 +From: Jeremiah Elliott +Reply-To: jelliott@artcobell.com +Organization: Artco-Bell Corp. +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: slow query - where not in +Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 14:58:48 -0600 +User-Agent: KMail/1.5 +References: <200303280938.50382.jelliott@artcobell.com> + <028e01c2f54a$9af3d010$3201a8c0@beeblebrox> + <20030328175356.GA12549@wolff.to> +In-Reply-To: <20030328175356.GA12549@wolff.to> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Disposition: inline +Message-Id: <200303281458.48326.jelliott@artcobell.com> +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-12.8 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_20,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES,USER_AGENT + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/187 +X-Sequence-Number: 1485 + +thanks guys - Greg, Bruno and Michael. That made a world of diferance. + +thx +-Jeremiah + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 04:49:29 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C874474E4F + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 04:49:24 -0500 (EST) +Received: from smtp.inode.at (smtp-01.inode.at [62.99.194.3]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D5D3474E42 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 04:49:23 -0500 (EST) +Received: from line-c-227.adsl-dynamic.inode.at ([62.99.151.227]:35123 + helo=andi-lap) by smtp.inode.at with smtp (Exim 4.10) + id 18zCwi-0005BU-00 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:48:17 +0100 +Received: by andi-lap (sSMTP sendmail emulation); + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:49:19 +0100 +Subject: Index not used, performance problem +From: Andreas Kostyrka +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; + boundary="=-d6Iv6pE/ZRMcQ9VEKCxJ" +Organization: +Message-Id: <1048931358.7539.11.camel@andi-lap> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 29 Mar 2003 10:49:19 +0100 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-19.2 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,PGP_SIGNATURE_2,USER_AGENT_XIMIAN + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/188 +X-Sequence-Number: 1486 + +--=-d6Iv6pE/ZRMcQ9VEKCxJ +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +Hi! + +I've got the following problem: +PostgreSQL 7.2.1-2 (Debian) on Duron/700MHz, 512MB, IDE hdd (laptop). + +I've got a table that has 6400 rows, an index on the deleted, nachname, +vorname and hvvsnummer attributes, and my O-R wrapper generate queries +like this: + +SELECT patient.id, patient.vorname, patient.nachname, patient.titel, +patient.geburtsdatum, patient.hvvsnummer, patient.geschlecht, +patient.adresse_id, patient.beruf, patient.kommentar, patient.cave, +patient.zusatzversicherung, patient.deleted FROM patient WHERE +((((patient.deleted =3D 'f') AND (patient.nachname LIKE 'K%')) AND +(patient.vorname LIKE '%')) AND (patient.hvvsnummer LIKE '%')) + +This results in a SeqScan von patient. Even more curious is that simpler +queries like=20 + +select * from patient where deleted=3D'f'; OR: +select * from patient where nachname LIKE 'K%'; + +all result in SeqScan on patient. + +I've "analyzed" and "reindex" the table already multiple times, and +still PostgreSQL insists upon not using any index. + +TIA for any pointers, + +Andreas + +mpp2=3D# \d patient + Table "patient" + Column | Type | Modifiers +--------------------+--------------+------------- + id | integer | not null + vorname | text | not null + nachname | text | not null + titel | text | + geburtsdatum | date | + hvvsnummer | text | + geschlecht | character(1) | + adresse_id | integer | + beruf | text | + kommentar | text | + cave | text | + zusatzversicherung | text | + deleted | boolean | default 'f' +Indexes: patient_deleted, + patient_hvvsnummer, + patient_nachname, + patient_vorname +Primary key: patient_pkey +Check constraints: "patient_geschlecht" (((geschlecht =3D 'm'::bpchar) OR +(geschlecht =3D 'w'::bpchar)) OR (geschlecht =3D '?'::bpchar)) +Triggers: RI_ConstraintTrigger_352787, + RI_ConstraintTrigger_352789, + RI_ConstraintTrigger_352801, + RI_ConstraintTrigger_352803, + RI_ConstraintTrigger_352815 + +mpp2=3D# select count(*) from patient; + count +------- + 6406 +(1 row) + +mpp2=3D# explain SELECT * FROM patient WHERE (patient.nachname LIKE 'K%'); +NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: + +Seq Scan on patient (cost=3D0.00..173.07 rows=3D272 width=3D70) + +EXPLAIN +mpp2=3D# explain SELECT * FROM patient WHERE NOT deleted; +NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: + +Seq Scan on patient (cost=3D0.00..157.06 rows=3D6406 width=3D70) + +EXPLAIN +mpp2=3D# explain SELECT * FROM patient WHERE deleted=3D'f'; +NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: + +Seq Scan on patient (cost=3D0.00..173.07 rows=3D6406 width=3D70) + +EXPLAIN + + + +--=-d6Iv6pE/ZRMcQ9VEKCxJ +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc +Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) + +iD8DBQA+hWweHJdudm4KnO0RAjaJAKCGChqjgKaA2sEHozzyGhFgjkYrOACgnKcR +pIaNAHrqykZ1xEfnGd2OBo0= +=l/Ao +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--=-d6Iv6pE/ZRMcQ9VEKCxJ-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 08:48:08 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38014475A45 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 08:48:06 -0500 (EST) +Received: from houston.familyhealth.com.au (unknown [203.59.48.253]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD6A4474E42 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 08:48:03 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost (chriskl@localhost) + by houston.familyhealth.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id + h2TDlpk04736; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 21:47:54 +0800 (WST) + (envelope-from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au) +Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 21:47:51 +0800 (WST) +From: Christopher Kings-Lynne +To: Andreas Kostyrka +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +In-Reply-To: <1048931358.7539.11.camel@andi-lap> +Message-ID: <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-26.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/189 +X-Sequence-Number: 1487 + +Hi Andreas, + +A few points: + +PostgreSQL is rarely going to use an index for a boolean column. The +reason is that since almost by definition true will occupy 50% of the rows +and false will occupy 50% (say). In this case, a sequential scan is +always faster. You would say that the 'selectivity' isn't good enough. + +As for the LIKE searches, the only ones that PostgreSQL can index are of +the form 'FOO%', which is what you are doing. However, I believe that +PostgreSQL cannot do this if your database encoding is anything other than +'C'. So, if you are using an Austrian encoding, it might not be able to +use the index. + +Some things to try: + +If you are always seeking over all four columns, then drop the 4 +individual indexes and create one like this: + +create index my_key on patient(nachname, vorname, hvvsnummer); + +That would be more efficient, in the C locale. + +Also, what is the point of searching for LIKE '%'? Why not just leave that +out? + +Chris + +On 29 Mar 2003, Andreas Kostyrka wrote: + +> Hi! +> +> I've got the following problem: +> PostgreSQL 7.2.1-2 (Debian) on Duron/700MHz, 512MB, IDE hdd (laptop). +> +> I've got a table that has 6400 rows, an index on the deleted, nachname, +> vorname and hvvsnummer attributes, and my O-R wrapper generate queries +> like this: +> +> SELECT patient.id, patient.vorname, patient.nachname, patient.titel, +> patient.geburtsdatum, patient.hvvsnummer, patient.geschlecht, +> patient.adresse_id, patient.beruf, patient.kommentar, patient.cave, +> patient.zusatzversicherung, patient.deleted FROM patient WHERE +> ((((patient.deleted = 'f') AND (patient.nachname LIKE 'K%')) AND +> (patient.vorname LIKE '%')) AND (patient.hvvsnummer LIKE '%')) +> +> This results in a SeqScan von patient. Even more curious is that simpler +> queries like +> +> select * from patient where deleted='f'; OR: +> select * from patient where nachname LIKE 'K%'; +> +> all result in SeqScan on patient. +> +> I've "analyzed" and "reindex" the table already multiple times, and +> still PostgreSQL insists upon not using any index. +> +> TIA for any pointers, +> +> Andreas +> +> mpp2=# \d patient +> Table "patient" +> Column | Type | Modifiers +> --------------------+--------------+------------- +> id | integer | not null +> vorname | text | not null +> nachname | text | not null +> titel | text | +> geburtsdatum | date | +> hvvsnummer | text | +> geschlecht | character(1) | +> adresse_id | integer | +> beruf | text | +> kommentar | text | +> cave | text | +> zusatzversicherung | text | +> deleted | boolean | default 'f' +> Indexes: patient_deleted, +> patient_hvvsnummer, +> patient_nachname, +> patient_vorname +> Primary key: patient_pkey +> Check constraints: "patient_geschlecht" (((geschlecht = 'm'::bpchar) OR +> (geschlecht = 'w'::bpchar)) OR (geschlecht = '?'::bpchar)) +> Triggers: RI_ConstraintTrigger_352787, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_352789, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_352801, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_352803, +> RI_ConstraintTrigger_352815 +> +> mpp2=# select count(*) from patient; +> count +> ------- +> 6406 +> (1 row) +> +> mpp2=# explain SELECT * FROM patient WHERE (patient.nachname LIKE 'K%'); +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Seq Scan on patient (cost=0.00..173.07 rows=272 width=70) +> +> EXPLAIN +> mpp2=# explain SELECT * FROM patient WHERE NOT deleted; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Seq Scan on patient (cost=0.00..157.06 rows=6406 width=70) +> +> EXPLAIN +> mpp2=# explain SELECT * FROM patient WHERE deleted='f'; +> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: +> +> Seq Scan on patient (cost=0.00..173.07 rows=6406 width=70) +> +> EXPLAIN +> +> +> + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 10:34:50 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BBCA475A45 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:34:49 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail.libertyrms.com (unknown [209.167.124.227]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 220B8474E42 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:34:48 -0500 (EST) +Received: from andrew by mail.libertyrms.com with local (Exim 3.22 #3 + (Debian)) + id 18zIM8-0004Ky-00 + for ; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:34:52 -0500 +Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:34:52 -0500 +From: Andrew Sullivan +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +Message-ID: <20030329103452.B16250@mail.libertyrms.com> +Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +References: <1048931358.7539.11.camel@andi-lap> + <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i +In-Reply-To: <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au>; + from chriskl@familyhealth.com.au on Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at + 09:47:51PM +0800 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MUTT + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/190 +X-Sequence-Number: 1488 + +On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 09:47:51PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: +> the form 'FOO%', which is what you are doing. However, I believe that +> PostgreSQL cannot do this if your database encoding is anything other than +> 'C'. So, if you are using an Austrian encoding, it might not be able to + +That is, you need to have had the LOCALE set to 'C' when you did +initdb. It's not enough to change it afterwards. + +A +-- +---- +Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street +Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada + M2P 2A8 + +1 416 646 3304 x110 + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 11:48:36 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBE704758F1 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:48:34 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail3.centurytel.net (mail3.centurytel.net [209.142.136.99]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E235474E42 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:48:30 -0500 (EST) +Received: from localhost.localdomain (pppoe0716.grp.centurytel.net + [64.91.27.209]) + by mail3.centurytel.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2TGmYTP017135 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:48:34 -0600 (CST) +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="iso-8859-1" +From: "John K. Herreshoff" +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:49:00 -0500 +User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 +References: <1048931358.7539.11.camel@andi-lap> + <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> + <20030329103452.B16250@mail.libertyrms.com> +In-Reply-To: <20030329103452.B16250@mail.libertyrms.com> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Message-Id: <200303291149.00790.jkherr@centurytel.net> +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.1 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_KMAIL + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/191 +X-Sequence-Number: 1489 + +In Linux (Redhat) where, exactly, does one set the LOCALE to C? + +TIA :-) + +John. + +On Saturday 29 March 2003 10:34 am, Andrew Sullivan wrote: +> On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 09:47:51PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: +> > the form 'FOO%', which is what you are doing. However, I believe that +> > PostgreSQL cannot do this if your database encoding is anything other +> > than 'C'. So, if you are using an Austrian encoding, it might not be +> > able to +> +> That is, you need to have had the LOCALE set to 'C' when you did +> initdb. It's not enough to change it afterwards. +> +> A + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 11:57:56 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F8F8475AE5 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:57:55 -0500 (EST) +Received: from smtp.inode.at (smtp-01.inode.at [62.99.194.3]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A56FD475A80 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:57:54 -0500 (EST) +Received: from line-c-227.adsl-dynamic.inode.at ([62.99.151.227]:35422 + helo=andi-lap) by smtp.inode.at with smtp (Exim 4.10) + id 18zJdR-0000wT-00; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 17:56:49 +0100 +Received: by andi-lap (sSMTP sendmail emulation); + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 17:57:58 +0100 +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +From: Andreas Kostyrka +To: Christopher Kings-Lynne +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +In-Reply-To: <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> +References: <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; + boundary="=-YhVtnAnJHYTlkgVB/PLB" +Organization: +Message-Id: <1048957078.7539.17.camel@andi-lap> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 29 Mar 2003 17:57:58 +0100 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-45.1 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,PGP_SIGNATURE_2, + QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, + USER_AGENT_XIMIAN autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/192 +X-Sequence-Number: 1490 + +--=-YhVtnAnJHYTlkgVB/PLB +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 14:47, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: +> As for the LIKE searches, the only ones that PostgreSQL can index are of +> the form 'FOO%', which is what you are doing. However, I believe that +> PostgreSQL cannot do this if your database encoding is anything other than +> 'C'. So, if you are using an Austrian encoding, it might not be able to +> use the index. +Well, I use LATIN1. How do I store 8-bit chars else? And if so, +PostgreSQL seems quite strongly broken, because a relational database +relies by design heavily on indexes. + +> Also, what is the point of searching for LIKE '%'? Why not just leave that +> out? +Well, it's about generating the SQL query. +Actually it's just a border case for searching for a given prefix. + +Andreas + +--=-YhVtnAnJHYTlkgVB/PLB +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc +Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) + +iD8DBQA+hdCVHJdudm4KnO0RAnB7AJ4hE5NYgPJmYjiWhnMexvRmfumf9ACgwuah +2XmtElYM+nBzciXeT5fWEDc= +=4NmH +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--=-YhVtnAnJHYTlkgVB/PLB-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 11:59:09 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6149475E82 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:59:08 -0500 (EST) +Received: from smtp.inode.at (smtp-04.inode.at [62.99.194.6]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C2C9475AE5 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:59:08 -0500 (EST) +Received: from line-c-227.adsl-dynamic.inode.at ([62.99.151.227]:35423 + helo=andi-lap) by smtp.inode.at with smtp (Exim 4.10) + id 18zJfg-0005IZ-00; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 17:59:09 +0100 +Received: by andi-lap (sSMTP sendmail emulation); + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 17:59:11 +0100 +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +From: Andreas Kostyrka +To: Christopher Kings-Lynne +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +In-Reply-To: <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> +References: <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; + boundary="=-doEA5B4TdHHZUNvSCiXQ" +Organization: +Message-Id: <1048957151.7543.19.camel@andi-lap> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 +Date: 29 Mar 2003 17:59:11 +0100 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-44.3 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,PGP_SIGNATURE_2, + QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, + USER_AGENT_XIMIAN autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/194 +X-Sequence-Number: 1492 + +--=-doEA5B4TdHHZUNvSCiXQ +Content-Type: text/plain +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 14:47, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: +> Hi Andreas, +>=20 +> A few points: +>=20 +> PostgreSQL is rarely going to use an index for a boolean column. The +> reason is that since almost by definition true will occupy 50% of the rows +> and false will occupy 50% (say). In this case, a sequential scan is +> always faster. You would say that the 'selectivity' isn't good enough. +Well, perhaps it should collect statistics, because a "deleted" column +is a prime candidate for a strongly skewed population. + +Andreas + +--=-doEA5B4TdHHZUNvSCiXQ +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc +Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) + +iD8DBQA+hdDfHJdudm4KnO0RAjstAJ0dJmy+cpD4fHR58w8/C7mbuivo2ACeLzWl +TCYdzdyza1fmtg3vN+sY4Qw= +=EHBI +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--=-doEA5B4TdHHZUNvSCiXQ-- + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 11:58:27 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12893475EE2 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:58:25 -0500 (EST) +Received: from indygecko.com (h24-77-222-182.ok.shawcable.net [24.77.222.182]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A2A8475ECE + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:58:24 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [192.168.10.10] ([::ffff:192.168.10.10]) + by indygecko.com with esmtp; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 08:58:27 -0800 +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +From: Jord Tanner +To: "John K. Herreshoff" +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +In-Reply-To: <200303291149.00790.jkherr@centurytel.net> +References: <1048931358.7539.11.camel@andi-lap> + <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> + <20030329103452.B16250@mail.libertyrms.com> + <200303291149.00790.jkherr@centurytel.net> +Organization: +Message-Id: <1048957169.7512.33.camel@gecko> +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.3 +Date: 29 Mar 2003 08:59:29 -0800 +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_XIMIAN + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/193 +X-Sequence-Number: 1491 + +# su postgres +% export LANG=C +% /usr/local/pgsql/bin/initdb blah blah + +That always works for me! + +On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 08:49, John K. Herreshoff wrote: +> In Linux (Redhat) where, exactly, does one set the LOCALE to C? +> +> TIA :-) +> +> John. +> +> On Saturday 29 March 2003 10:34 am, Andrew Sullivan wrote: +> > On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 09:47:51PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: +> > > the form 'FOO%', which is what you are doing. However, I believe that +> > > PostgreSQL cannot do this if your database encoding is anything other +> > > than 'C'. So, if you are using an Austrian encoding, it might not be +> > > able to +> > +> > That is, you need to have had the LOCALE set to 'C' when you did +> > initdb. It's not enough to change it afterwards. +> > +> > A +> +> +> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- +> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate +> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your +> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly +-- +Jord Tanner + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 12:54:57 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C94C9475A80 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 12:54:56 -0500 (EST) +Received: from ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com (ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com + [24.93.36.230]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E5B2475A8D + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 12:54:55 -0500 (EST) +Received: from spaceship.com (cs24243214-140.austin.rr.com [24.243.214.140]) + by ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h2THt0df001360 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 12:55:00 -0500 (EST) +Message-ID: <3E85DDF4.7060406@spaceship.com> +Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:55:00 -0600 +From: Matt Mello +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3b) Gecko/20030210 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +References: <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> + <1048957151.7543.19.camel@andi-lap> +In-Reply-To: <1048957151.7543.19.camel@andi-lap> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-38.8 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/195 +X-Sequence-Number: 1493 + +I have many boolean columns, and my queries almost always use indexes. +Just because a column can have only 2 values does not mean that 50% of +them will be true and 50% will be false. The ratio of T|F depends on +the content. I have some boolean columns with less than 1% true. +Obviously, an index will help with these ... and it does, tremendously. + +If you only have 6400 rows, it is *possible* that the planner will +choose not to use an index, as using an index might be slower than just +seqscanning. + +If you do lots of updates on that table, you might need to do a vacuum +full occasionally, although I'm not certain how much that benefits a +boolean field. + +Also, if possible, I would consider upgrading to a more recent version. + I have seen many of the experts here post news about significant bug +fixes between 7.2 and 7.3. (My experience with boolean fields is using +7.3.) + +In addition, when posting to the list, it is helpful to post an "explain +analyze" for a query, as it gives more & better details (for those same +experts, of which I am not). + + +Andreas Kostyrka wrote: +> On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 14:47, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: +> +>>Hi Andreas, +>> +>>A few points: +>> +>>PostgreSQL is rarely going to use an index for a boolean column. The +>>reason is that since almost by definition true will occupy 50% of the rows +>>and false will occupy 50% (say). In this case, a sequential scan is +>>always faster. You would say that the 'selectivity' isn't good enough. +> +> Well, perhaps it should collect statistics, because a "deleted" column +> is a prime candidate for a strongly skewed population. +> +> Andreas + +-- +Matt Mello +512-350-6900 + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 16:16:08 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1810C475A8D + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 16:16:06 -0500 (EST) +Received: from post-20.mail.nl.demon.net (post-20.mail.nl.demon.net + [194.159.73.1]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B002E474E42 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 16:16:04 -0500 (EST) +Received: from [212.238.27.227] (helo=itaudit.demon.nl) + by post-20.mail.nl.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) + id 18zNgK-000O4w-00 + for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 21:16:05 +0000 +Message-ID: <3E860D66.9030209@itaudit.demon.nl> +Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 22:17:26 +0100 +From: Wil Peters +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 +X-Accept-Language: en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Bad perfomance of pl/pgsql-function on new server +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Spam-Status: No, + hits=-12.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_10,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/196 +X-Sequence-Number: 1494 + +Hi, + +I've written a pl/pgsql-function called 'f_matchstr' to support a +search-module on several websites. In short, the function scans the +content of a field and counts the occurances of a given search-string. + +The complete function is listed below. + +On a database-server that runs SuSE-linux 7.1 and PostgreSQL 7.2 the +function perfoms fine. Even when text-fields are accessed with large +volumes of text inside the response is OK. This is also very important, +because the search-module is used to scan articles that are stored in a +databasetable. + +Recently the database-server is upgraded. It now runs SuSE 8.1 and +PostgreSQL 7.2. I copied the databases to the new server using +pg_dumpall etc. + +On the new server - although this server has far better specs! - the +function does NOT perfom as well as on the old server. Searches take +several minutes, where on the old server a few SECONDS where needed. + +As far as I can see the settings of PostgreSQL on both servers are the same. + +Can someone help me with this problem?? + +Thanx, + +Wil Peters +www.ldits.nl + + + + +-- Name: "f_matchstr" (text,text,integer,integer) +-- Type: FUNCTION +-- Owner: postgres + +CREATE FUNCTION "f_matchstr" (text,text,integer,integer) RETURNS integer +AS 'DECLARE + fld text; -- Field + sstr text; -- Searchstring + scptn ALIAS FOR $3; -- Case-sensitivity + sxmtch integer; -- Exact-matching + match integer; -- Number of matches + i integer; + lenfld integer; + lensstr integer; + srchstr text; + middle text; + lenmiddle integer; +BEGIN + fld := $1; + sstr := $2; + sxmtch := $4; + lenfld := length(fld); + lensstr := length(sstr); + i := 1; + match := 0; + + -- Work case insensitive + IF scptn = 0 THEN + fld := lower(fld); -- Set fieldcontent to lowercase + sstr := lower(sstr); -- Set searchstring to lowercase + END IF; + + IF lenfld = lensstr THEN + sxmtch := 0; -- Setting of sxmtch does not matter + END IF; + + -- Set searchstring + srchstr := '''' || sstr || ''''; + + IF fld ~ srchstr THEN + IF lensstr <= lenfld AND sxmtch = 0 THEN + -- Walk trough fieldcontent + WHILE i <= lenfld LOOP + IF substring(fld,i,lensstr) = sstr THEN + match := match + 1; + END IF; + i := i + 1; + -- Escape from loop if 10 matches are reached + IF match >= 10 THEN + i := lenfld + 1; + END IF; + END LOOP; + ELSIF lensstr < lenfld AND sxmtch = 1 THEN + -- Set searchstring for begin of fieldcontent + srchstr := ''^'' || sstr || ''[ ,:?!]+''; + IF substring(fld,1,lensstr+1) ~ srchstr THEN + match := match + 1; + END IF; + -- Set searchstring for end of fieldcontent + srchstr := '' '' || sstr || ''[.?!]?$''; + IF substring(fld,lenfld-lensstr-1,lensstr+2) ~ srchstr THEN + match := match + 1; + END IF; + -- Extract middle part of fieldcontent + middle := substring(fld,lensstr+1,lenfld-(2*lensstr)); + -- Store length of middle part + lenmiddle := length(middle); + -- Set searchstring for end of fieldcontent + -- See below for regular expression thas is needed + srchstr := ''[ >("\\'' || '''''' || '']+'' || sstr || ''[ ,.:?!)<"\\'' +|| '''''' || '']+''; + -- Walk trough middle part of fieldcontent + WHILE i <= lenmiddle LOOP + IF substring(middle,i,lensstr+2) ~ srchstr THEN + match := match + 1; + END IF; + i := i + 1; + -- Escape from loop if 10 matches are reached + IF match >= 10 THEN + i := lenmiddle + 1; + END IF; + END LOOP; + END IF; + END IF; + RETURN match; +END;' LANGUAGE 'plpgsql'; + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 18:14:01 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB845475AE5 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:13:59 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1368C4758E6 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:13:59 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2TNDTub000936; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:13:29 -0500 (EST) +To: Andreas Kostyrka +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +In-reply-to: <1048957078.7539.17.camel@andi-lap> +References: <20030329214139.N4697-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au> + <1048957078.7539.17.camel@andi-lap> +Comments: In-reply-to Andreas Kostyrka + message dated "29 Mar 2003 17:57:58 +0100" +Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:13:28 -0500 +Message-ID: <935.1048979608@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/197 +X-Sequence-Number: 1495 + +Andreas Kostyrka writes: +> On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 14:47, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: +>> As for the LIKE searches, the only ones that PostgreSQL can index are of +>> the form 'FOO%', which is what you are doing. However, I believe that +>> PostgreSQL cannot do this if your database encoding is anything other than +>> 'C'. So, if you are using an Austrian encoding, it might not be able to +>> use the index. + +> Well, I use LATIN1. How do I store 8-bit chars else? + +You are both confusing locale with encoding. The LIKE optimization +requires 'C' locale, but it should work with any encoding (or at least +any single-byte encoding; not sure about multibyte). + +> And if so, PostgreSQL seems quite strongly broken, because a +> relational database relies by design heavily on indexes. + +Some of us would reply that the locales are broken ;-). The bizarre +sorting rules demanded by so many locales are what make it impossible +to optimize a LIKE prefix into an indexscan. See the archives for +the reasons why our many tries at this have failed. + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Sat Mar 29 18:25:45 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D23CD475AE5 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:25:43 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50534758E6 + for ; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:25:41 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2TNPhub001004; + Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:25:43 -0500 (EST) +To: Wil Peters +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Bad perfomance of pl/pgsql-function on new server +In-reply-to: <3E860D66.9030209@itaudit.demon.nl> +References: <3E860D66.9030209@itaudit.demon.nl> +Comments: In-reply-to Wil Peters + message dated "Sat, 29 Mar 2003 22:17:26 +0100" +Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:25:43 -0500 +Message-ID: <1001.1048980343@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/198 +X-Sequence-Number: 1496 + +Wil Peters writes: +> On the new server - although this server has far better specs! - the +> function does NOT perfom as well as on the old server. Searches take +> several minutes, where on the old server a few SECONDS where needed. + +Is the new installation really equivalent to the old? I'd wonder about +differences in multibyte compilation option, database locale and +encoding, etc. Any of these could result in a huge hit in text-pushing +performance. + +Another traditional post-upgrade problem is forgetting to VACUUM +ANALYZE; but that probably shouldn't affect this function, since it's +not issuing any database queries. + +(Personally I'd have written this sort of function in plperl or pltcl, +either of which are far more appropriate for text-string-mashing than +plpgsql. But that's not really answering your question.) + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 10:46:39 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E440A476478 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 10:40:06 -0500 (EST) +Received: from Morgoth.esiway.net (Morgoth.ESIWAY.NET [193.194.16.157]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2D6D4765FA + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 07:07:03 -0500 (EST) +Received: from Megathlon.ESI (Ghost.esi.it [193.194.16.225]) + by Morgoth.esiway.net (8.11.6p2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2VC6ph14693 + (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168 bits) verified + FAIL) + for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:06:52 +0200 +Received: from relay.ESI (IDENT:marco@relay.ESI [10.10.10.3]) + (authenticated (0 bits)) + by Megathlon.ESI (8.11.6p2/8.11.5) with ESMTP id h2VC6oO30189 + (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168 bits) verified + NO) + for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:06:51 +0200 +Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:06:50 +0200 (CEST) +From: Marco Colombo +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: WAL monitoring and optimizing +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-12.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01,USER_AGENT_PINE + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/199 +X-Sequence-Number: 1497 + +Hi, i'm running 7.2.3 (on RHL7.3). I've read the "WAL Configuration" +section of the manual: + +http://www.postgresql.org/docs/view.php?version=7.2&idoc=0&file=wal-configuration.html + +I've set wal_debug = 1 in postgresql.conf, but there's no example +of how LogInsert and LogFlush are logged. I can find many + +DEBUG: XLogFlush: request 6/6D8F54BC; write 6/6E13ECB8; flush 6/6E13ECB8 + +lines in my log, but no XLogInsert. There are lot of + +DEBUG: INSERT @ 6/70DC8744: prev 6/70DC8564; xprev 6/70DC8564; xid 372353616; bkpb 1: Btree - insert: node 9468978/12901623; + +lines, but it's not clear if they are calls to LogInsert or something +different. They also come in different kinds (Btree - insert, +Heap - update, Transaction - commit, XLOG - checkpoint:, maybe others) +and I don't know which ones I should be looking for. + +I've got 7365 'XLogFlush:' lines and 23275 'INSERT @' lines in the +last 9 hours. Should I increase the number of WAL buffers? + +TIA, +.TM. +-- + ____/ ____/ / + / / / Marco Colombo + ___/ ___ / / Technical Manager + / / / ESI s.r.l. + _____/ _____/ _/ Colombo@ESI.it + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 12:54:46 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AF8C475F09 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:54:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE71A475EDF + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:54:43 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h2VHsl2L023937; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:54:47 -0500 (EST) +To: Marco Colombo +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: WAL monitoring and optimizing +In-reply-to: +References: +Comments: In-reply-to Marco Colombo + message dated "Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:06:50 +0200" +Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:54:46 -0500 +Message-ID: <23936.1049133286@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/200 +X-Sequence-Number: 1498 + +Marco Colombo writes: +> I've got 7365 'XLogFlush:' lines and 23275 'INSERT @' lines in the +> last 9 hours. Should I increase the number of WAL buffers? + +With a transaction rate as low as that, I wouldn't think you need to. + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 13:28:30 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C74F475F1B + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:28:29 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail1.ihs.com (mail1.ihs.com [170.207.70.222]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81ADC475F09 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:28:28 -0500 (EST) +Received: from css120.ihs.com (css120.ihs.com [170.207.105.120]) + by mail1.ihs.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h2VINtWU001764; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 11:23:56 -0700 (MST) +Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 11:21:45 -0700 (MST) +From: "scott.marlowe" +To: Andreas Kostyrka +Cc: +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +In-Reply-To: <1048957151.7543.19.camel@andi-lap> +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-MailScanner: Found to be clean +X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-31.7 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_PINE autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/201 +X-Sequence-Number: 1499 + +On 29 Mar 2003, Andreas Kostyrka wrote: + +> On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 14:47, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: +> > Hi Andreas, +> > +> > A few points: +> > +> > PostgreSQL is rarely going to use an index for a boolean column. The +> > reason is that since almost by definition true will occupy 50% of the rows +> > and false will occupy 50% (say). In this case, a sequential scan is +> > always faster. You would say that the 'selectivity' isn't good enough. +> Well, perhaps it should collect statistics, because a "deleted" column +> is a prime candidate for a strongly skewed population. + +It does. When you run analyze. You have vacuumed and analyzed the +database right? + +Assuming you have, it's often better to make a partial index for your +booleans. I'll assume that patient.deleted being true is a more rare +condition than false, since false is the default. + +So, create your index this way to make it smaller and faster: + +create index dxname on sometable (bool_field) where bool_field IS TRUE; + +Now you have a tiny little index that gets scanned ultra fast and is easy +to maintain. You have to, however, access it the same way. the proper +way to reference a bool field is with IS [NOT] {TRUE|FALSE} + +select * from some_table where bool_field IS TRUE would match the index I +created aboce. + +select * from some_table where bool_field = 't' would not. + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 13:54:03 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AC1E475AF8 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:54:02 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 762B947580B + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:53:58 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h2VIrs2L024342; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:53:54 -0500 (EST) +To: "scott.marlowe" +Cc: Andreas Kostyrka , + pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: Index not used, performance problem +In-reply-to: +References: +Comments: In-reply-to "scott.marlowe" + message dated "Mon, 31 Mar 2003 11:21:45 -0700" +Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:53:54 -0500 +Message-ID: <24341.1049136834@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/202 +X-Sequence-Number: 1500 + +"scott.marlowe" writes: +> So, create your index this way to make it smaller and faster: +> create index dxname on sometable (bool_field) where bool_field IS TRUE; + +Also note that the index itself could be on some other column; for +example if you do + + create index fooi on foo (intcol) where boolcol; + +then a query like + + select ... from foo where intcol >= 42 and boolcol; + +could use the index to exploit both WHERE conditions. + +> You have to, however, access it the same way. the proper +> way to reference a bool field is with IS [NOT] {TRUE|FALSE} + +This strikes me as pedantry. "WHERE bool" (resp. "WHERE NOT bool") has +the same semantics and is easier to read, at least to me. (Of course, +if you think differently, then by all means write the form that seems +clearest to you.) + +But yeah, the condition appearing in the actual queries had best match +what's used in the partial-index CREATE command exactly. The planner is +not real smart about deducing "this implies that". + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 15:55:46 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEACA475D91 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 15:55:44 -0500 (EST) +Received: from web21104.mail.yahoo.com (web21104.mail.yahoo.com + [216.136.227.106]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DF5CE475AF8 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 15:55:43 -0500 (EST) +Message-ID: <20030331205544.19785.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com> +Received: from [208.253.218.33] by web21104.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:55:44 PST +Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:55:44 -0800 (PST) +From: Shankar K +Subject: ext3 filesystem / linux 7.3 +To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_10,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS + version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/203 +X-Sequence-Number: 1501 + +hi there, + +I was reading bruce's 'postgresql hardware performance +tuning' article and he has suggested ext3 filesystem +with data mode = writeback for high performance. + +I would really appreciate if anyone could share your +experiences with ext3 from a production stand point or +any other suggestions for best read/write performance. + +Our applications is an hybrid of heavy inserts/updates +and DSS queries. + +version - postgres 7.3.2 +hardware - raid 5 (5 x 73 g hardware raid), 4g ram, 2 +* 2.8 GHz cpu, redhat 7.3 + +Note : we don't have the luxury of raid 1+0 (dedicated +disks) for xlog and clog files to start with but may +be down the line we might look into those options, but +for now i've planned on having them on local drives +rather than raid 5. + +thanks for any inputs, +Shankar + + + + + + +__________________________________________________ +Do you Yahoo!? +Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! +http://platinum.yahoo.com + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 16:13:19 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE41475D91 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:13:18 -0500 (EST) +Received: from spirit.aldeiadigital.com.br + (iplus-fac-213-137.xdsl-fixo.ctbcnetsuper.com.br [200.225.213.137]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA91D475CEE + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:13:15 -0500 (EST) +Received: from aldeiadigital.com.br (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) + by spirit.aldeiadigital.com.br (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id + h2VLDQa01207 + for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:13:27 -0300 +Received: from 200.225.202.15 (SquirrelMail authenticated user alepaes) + by webmail.ad2.com.br with HTTP; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:13:27 -0300 (BRT) +Message-ID: <10846.200.225.202.15.1049145207.squirrel@webmail.ad2.com.br> +Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:13:27 -0300 (BRT) +Subject: 30-70 seconds query... +From: "alexandre :: aldeia digital" +To: +X-Priority: 3 +Importance: Normal +X-MSMail-Priority: Normal +X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.7) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 +X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_20,MISSING_MIMEOLE,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/204 +X-Sequence-Number: 1502 + +Hi all, + +I use a case tool and we generate the querys automatically. +The query explained is a part of an Report and takes a long time +to complete (30 ~ 70 seconds). My machine is a Dual Xeon 2 Ghz, 1 Mb DDR, +3 SCSI HW RAID 5. +The tables involved in query have 500.000 rows. + +Thank=B4s for any help... + +Alexandre + + +explain analyze SELECT T2.fi08ufemp, T4.es10almtra, T3.fi08MovEst, +T1.es10qtdgra, T1.es10Tamanh, T1.es10item, T1.es10numdoc, T1.fi08codigo, +T1.es10tipdoc, T1.es10codemp, T4.es10codalm, T4.es10empa, T1.es10datlan, +T4.co13CodPro, T4.co13Emp06, T1.es10EmpTam FROM (((ES10T2 T1 LEFT JOIN +ES10T T2 ON T2.es10codemp =3D T1.es10codemp AND T2.es10datlan =3D +T1.es10datlan AND T2.es10tipdoc =3D T1.es10tipdoc AND T2.fi08codigo =3D +T1.fi08codigo AND T2.es10numdoc =3D T1.es10numdoc) LEFT JOIN FI08T T3 ON +T3.fi08ufemp =3D T2.fi08ufemp AND T3.fi08codigo =3DT1.fi08codigo) LEFT JO= +IN +ES10T1 T4 ON T4.es10codemp =3D T1.es10codemp AND T4.es10datlan =3D +T1.es10datlan AND T4.es10tipdoc =3D T1.es10tipdoc AND T4.fi08codigo =3D +T1.fi08codigo AND T4.es10numdoc =3D T1.es10numdoc AND T4.es10item =3D +T1.es10item) WHERE ( T4.co13Emp06 =3D '1' AND T4.co13CodPro =3D '16998' A= +ND +T1.es10datlan >=3D '2003-02-01'::date ) AND ( T1.es10datlan >=3D +'2003-02-01'::date) AND ( T3.fi08MovEst =3D 'S' ) AND ( T4.es10empa =3D '1'= + OR +( '1' =3D 0 ) ) AND ( T4.es10codalm =3D '0' OR T4.es10almtra =3D '0' OR (= + '0' +=3D 0 ) ) AND ( T1.es10datlan <=3D '2003-02-28'::date ) ORDER BY +T4.co13Emp06, T4.co13CodPro, T1.es10datlan, T4.es10empa, T4.es10codalm, +T4.es10almtra, T1.es10codemp, T1.es10tipdoc, T1.fi08codigo, +T1.es10numdoc, T1.es10item; + + + QUERY PLAN +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +------------------------------------------ + Sort (cost=3D379749.51..379833.81 rows=3D33722 width=3D142) (actual +time=3D74031.72..74031.72 rows=3D0 loops=3D1) + Sort Key: t4.co13emp06, t4.co13codpro, t1.es10datlan, t4.es10empa, +t4.es10codalm, t4.es10almtra, t1.es10codemp, t1.es10tipdoc, +t1.fi08codigo, t1.es10numdoc, t1.es10item + -> Nested Loop (cost=3D1160.89..377213.38 rows=3D33722 width=3D142) (a= +ctual +time=3D74031.18..74031.18 rows=3D0 loops=3D1) + Filter: (("inner".co13emp06 =3D 1::smallint) AND +("inner".co13codpro =3D 16998) AND ("inner".es10empa =3D +1::smallint)) + -> Hash Join (cost=3D1160.89..173492.20 rows=3D33722 width=3D99) +(actual time=3D35.98..27046.08 rows=3D33660 loops=3D1) + Hash Cond: ("outer".fi08codigo =3D "inner".fi08codigo) + Join Filter: ("inner".fi08ufemp =3D "outer".fi08ufemp) + Filter: ("inner".fi08movest =3D 'S'::bpchar) + -> Hash Join (cost=3D1120.19..172524.13 rows=3D33722 +width=3D86) (actual time=3D33.64..26566.83 rows=3D33660 loops=3D1) + Hash Cond: ("outer".es10datlan =3D "inner".es10datlan) + Join Filter: (("inner".es10codemp =3D +"outer".es10codemp) AND ("inner".es10tipdoc =3D +"outer".es10tipdoc) AND ("inner".fi08codigo =3D +"outer".fi08codigo) AND ("inner".es10numdoc =3D +"outer".es10numdoc)) + -> Index Scan using es10t2_ad1 on es10t2 t1=20 +(cost=3D0.00..1148.09 rows=3D33722 width=3D51) (actual +time=3D0.08..1885.06 rows=3D33660 loops=3D1) + Index Cond: ((es10datlan >=3D '2003-02-01'::date) +AND (es10datlan <=3D '2003-02-28'::date)) + -> Hash (cost=3D1109.15..1109.15 rows=3D4415 width= +=3D35) +(actual time=3D33.23..33.23 rows=3D0 loops=3D1) + -> Seq Scan on es10t t2 (cost=3D0.00..1109.15 +rows=3D4415 width=3D35) (actual time=3D0.03..24.63 +rows=3D4395 loops=3D1) + -> Hash (cost=3D40.16..40.16 rows=3D216 width=3D13) (actual +time=3D1.91..1.91 rows=3D0 loops=3D1) + -> Seq Scan on fi08t t3 (cost=3D0.00..40.16 rows=3D2= +16 +width=3D13) (actual time=3D0.03..1.46 rows=3D216 loops=3D1) + -> Index Scan using es10t1_pkey on es10t1 t4 (cost=3D0.00..6.01 +rows=3D1 width=3D43) (actual time=3D1.38..1.39 rows=3D1 loops=3D33660) + Index Cond: ((t4.es10codemp =3D "outer".es10codemp) AND +(t4.es10datlan =3D "outer".es10datlan) AND (t4.es10tipdoc =3D +"outer".es10tipdoc) AND (t4.fi08codigo =3D +"outer".fi08codigo) AND (t4.es10numdoc =3D +"outer".es10numdoc) AND (t4.es10item =3D "outer".es10item)) + Total runtime: 74032.60 msec +(20 rows) + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 17:13:48 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19AEC475E14 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:13:47 -0500 (EST) +Received: from serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (serwer.skawsoft.com.pl [213.25.37.66]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A39A9475D91 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:13:45 -0500 (EST) +Received: from klaster.net (pa234.krakow.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl [213.76.36.234]) + by serwer.skawsoft.com.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP + id 4A5206A281; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 00:13:44 +0200 (CEST) +Message-ID: <3E88BE02.9020203@klaster.net> +Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 00:15:30 +0200 +From: Tomasz Myrta +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; pl-PL; + rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 +X-Accept-Language: pl, en-us, en +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: "alexandre:"@serwer.skawsoft.com.pl:aldeia digital + +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: 30-70 seconds query... +References: <10846.200.225.202.15.1049145207.squirrel@webmail.ad2.com.br> +In-Reply-To: <10846.200.225.202.15.1049145207.squirrel@webmail.ad2.com.br> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-30.3 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_10,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,RCVD_IN_RFCI, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA + autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/205 +X-Sequence-Number: 1503 + +Uz.ytkownik alexandre :: aldeia digital napisa?: +> Hi all, +>=20 +> I use a case tool and we generate the querys automatically. +> The query explained is a part of an Report and takes a long time +> to complete (30 ~ 70 seconds). My machine is a Dual Xeon 2 Ghz, 1 Mb DDR, +> 3 SCSI HW RAID 5. +> The tables involved in query have 500.000 rows. +>=20 +> Thank=B4s for any help... +>=20 +> Alexandre +>=20 +>=20 +> explain analyze SELECT T2.fi08ufemp, T4.es10almtra, T3.fi08MovEst, +> T1.es10qtdgra, T1.es10Tamanh, T1.es10item, T1.es10numdoc, T1.fi08codigo, +> T1.es10tipdoc, T1.es10codemp, T4.es10codalm, T4.es10empa, T1.es10datlan, +> T4.co13CodPro, T4.co13Emp06, T1.es10EmpTam FROM (((ES10T2 T1 LEFT JOIN +> ES10T T2 ON T2.es10codemp =3D T1.es10codemp AND T2.es10datlan =3D +> T1.es10datlan AND T2.es10tipdoc =3D T1.es10tipdoc AND T2.fi08codigo =3D +> T1.fi08codigo AND T2.es10numdoc =3D T1.es10numdoc) LEFT JOIN FI08T T3 ON +> T3.fi08ufemp =3D T2.fi08ufemp AND T3.fi08codigo =3DT1.fi08codigo) LEFT = +JOIN +> ES10T1 T4 ON T4.es10codemp =3D T1.es10codemp AND T4.es10datlan =3D +> T1.es10datlan AND T4.es10tipdoc =3D T1.es10tipdoc AND T4.fi08codigo =3D +> T1.fi08codigo AND T4.es10numdoc =3D T1.es10numdoc AND T4.es10item =3D +> T1.es10item) WHERE ( T4.co13Emp06 =3D '1' AND T4.co13CodPro =3D '16998'= + AND +> T1.es10datlan >=3D '2003-02-01'::date ) AND ( T1.es10datlan >=3D +> '2003-02-01'::date) AND ( T3.fi08MovEst =3D 'S' ) AND ( T4.es10empa =3D '= +1' OR +> ( '1' =3D 0 ) ) AND ( T4.es10codalm =3D '0' OR T4.es10almtra =3D '0' OR= + ( '0' +> =3D 0 ) ) AND ( T1.es10datlan <=3D '2003-02-28'::date ) ORDER BY +> T4.co13Emp06, T4.co13CodPro, T1.es10datlan, T4.es10empa, T4.es10codalm, +> T4.es10almtra, T1.es10codemp, T1.es10tipdoc, T1.fi08codigo, +> T1.es10numdoc, T1.es10item; +>=20 +>=20 +> QUERY PLAN +> -------------------------------------------------------------------------= +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +-------------------------------------------- +> Sort (cost=3D379749.51..379833.81 rows=3D33722 width=3D142) (actual +> time=3D74031.72..74031.72 rows=3D0 loops=3D1) +> Sort Key: t4.co13emp06, t4.co13codpro, t1.es10datlan, t4.es10empa, +> t4.es10codalm, t4.es10almtra, t1.es10codemp, t1.es10tipdoc, +> t1.fi08codigo, t1.es10numdoc, t1.es10item +> -> Nested Loop (cost=3D1160.89..377213.38 rows=3D33722 width=3D142) = +(actual +> time=3D74031.18..74031.18 rows=3D0 loops=3D1) +> Filter: (("inner".co13emp06 =3D 1::smallint) AND +> ("inner".co13codpro =3D 16998) AND ("inner".es10empa =3D +> 1::smallint)) +> -> Hash Join (cost=3D1160.89..173492.20 rows=3D33722 width=3D9= +9) +> (actual time=3D35.98..27046.08 rows=3D33660 loops=3D1) +> Hash Cond: ("outer".fi08codigo =3D "inner".fi08codigo) +> Join Filter: ("inner".fi08ufemp =3D "outer".fi08ufemp) +> Filter: ("inner".fi08movest =3D 'S'::bpchar) +> -> Hash Join (cost=3D1120.19..172524.13 rows=3D33722 +> width=3D86) (actual time=3D33.64..26566.83 rows=3D33660 loops=3D1) +> Hash Cond: ("outer".es10datlan =3D "inner".es10datla= +n) +> Join Filter: (("inner".es10codemp =3D +> "outer".es10codemp) AND ("inner".es10tipdoc =3D +> "outer".es10tipdoc) AND ("inner".fi08codigo =3D +> "outer".fi08codigo) AND ("inner".es10numdoc =3D +> "outer".es10numdoc)) +> -> Index Scan using es10t2_ad1 on es10t2 t1=20 +> (cost=3D0.00..1148.09 rows=3D33722 width=3D51) (actual +> time=3D0.08..1885.06 rows=3D33660 loops=3D1) +> Index Cond: ((es10datlan >=3D '2003-02-01'::da= +te) +> AND (es10datlan <=3D '2003-02-28'::date)) +> -> Hash (cost=3D1109.15..1109.15 rows=3D4415 width= +=3D35) +> (actual time=3D33.23..33.23 rows=3D0 loops=3D1) +> -> Seq Scan on es10t t2 (cost=3D0.00..1109.15 +> rows=3D4415 width=3D35) (actual time=3D0.03..24.63 +> rows=3D4395 loops=3D1) +> -> Hash (cost=3D40.16..40.16 rows=3D216 width=3D13) (act= +ual +> time=3D1.91..1.91 rows=3D0 loops=3D1) +> -> Seq Scan on fi08t t3 (cost=3D0.00..40.16 rows= +=3D216 +> width=3D13) (actual time=3D0.03..1.46 rows=3D216 loops=3D1) +> -> Index Scan using es10t1_pkey on es10t1 t4 (cost=3D0.00..6.01 +> rows=3D1 width=3D43) (actual time=3D1.38..1.39 rows=3D1 loops=3D33660) +> Index Cond: ((t4.es10codemp =3D "outer".es10codemp) AND +> (t4.es10datlan =3D "outer".es10datlan) AND (t4.es10tipdoc =3D +> "outer".es10tipdoc) AND (t4.fi08codigo =3D +> "outer".fi08codigo) AND (t4.es10numdoc =3D +> "outer".es10numdoc) AND (t4.es10item =3D "outer".es10item)) +> Total runtime: 74032.60 msec +> (20 rows) + +Is the query below the same to yours? + +explain analyze +SELECT T2.fi08ufemp, T4.es10almtra, T3.fi08MovEst, + T1.es10qtdgra, T1.es10Tamanh, T1.es10item, T1.es10numdoc, T1.fi08codigo, + T1.es10tipdoc, T1.es10codemp, T4.es10codalm, T4.es10empa, T1.es10datlan, + T4.co13CodPro, T4.co13Emp06, T1.es10EmpTam +FROM + ES10T2 T1 + LEFT JOIN T2 using=20 +(es10codemp,es10datlan,es10tipdoc,fi08codigo,es10numdoc) + LEFT JOIN FI08T T3 using (fi08ufemp,fi08codigo) + LEFT JOIN ES10T1 T4 using=20 +(es10codemp,es10datlan,es10tipdoc,fi08codigo,es10numdoc,es10item) +WHERE ( T4.co13Emp06 =3D '1' AND T4.co13CodPro =3D '16998' AND + T1.es10datlan >=3D '2003-02-01'::date ) AND ( T1.es10datlan >=3D + '2003-02-01'::date) AND ( T3.fi08MovEst =3D 'S' ) AND ( T4.es10empa =3D '= +1' OR + ( '1' =3D 0 ) ) AND ( T4.es10codalm =3D '0' OR T4.es10almtra =3D '0' OR= + ( '0' + =3D 0 ) ) AND ( T1.es10datlan <=3D '2003-02-28'::date ) +ORDER BY + T4.co13Emp06, T4.co13CodPro, T1.es10datlan, T4.es10empa, T4.es10codalm, + T4.es10almtra, T1.es10codemp, T1.es10tipdoc, T1.fi08codigo, + T1.es10numdoc, T1.es10item; + +I have some ideas for your query: +- you can probably change outer joins into inner ones because of your=20 +where clauses +- it looks like the most selective where clause is on t4. Maybe you=20 +should rewrite your query to have T4 first after "from"? +Check how selective is each your where condition and reorder "from=20 +...tables...." to use your where selectivity. + +Regards, +Tomasz Myrta + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 17:17:26 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20FF3475D91 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:17:25 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C6E475CEE + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:17:24 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h2VMHK2L025611; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:17:20 -0500 (EST) +To: "alexandre :: aldeia digital" +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: 30-70 seconds query... +In-reply-to: <10846.200.225.202.15.1049145207.squirrel@webmail.ad2.com.br> +References: <10846.200.225.202.15.1049145207.squirrel@webmail.ad2.com.br> +Comments: In-reply-to "alexandre :: aldeia digital" + + message dated "Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:13:27 -0300" +Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:17:20 -0500 +Message-ID: <25610.1049149040@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/206 +X-Sequence-Number: 1504 + +"alexandre :: aldeia digital" writes: +> I use a case tool and we generate the querys automatically. + +> explain analyze SELECT T2.fi08ufemp, T4.es10almtra, T3.fi08MovEst, +> T1.es10qtdgra, T1.es10Tamanh, T1.es10item, T1.es10numdoc, T1.fi08codigo, +> T1.es10tipdoc, T1.es10codemp, T4.es10codalm, T4.es10empa, T1.es10datlan, +> T4.co13CodPro, T4.co13Emp06, T1.es10EmpTam FROM (((ES10T2 T1 LEFT JOIN +> ES10T T2 ON T2.es10codemp = T1.es10codemp AND T2.es10datlan = +> T1.es10datlan AND T2.es10tipdoc = T1.es10tipdoc AND T2.fi08codigo = +> T1.fi08codigo AND T2.es10numdoc = T1.es10numdoc) LEFT JOIN FI08T T3 ON +> T3.fi08ufemp = T2.fi08ufemp AND T3.fi08codigo =T1.fi08codigo) LEFT JOIN +> ES10T1 T4 ON T4.es10codemp = T1.es10codemp AND T4.es10datlan = +> T1.es10datlan AND T4.es10tipdoc = T1.es10tipdoc AND T4.fi08codigo = +> T1.fi08codigo AND T4.es10numdoc = T1.es10numdoc AND T4.es10item = +> T1.es10item) WHERE ( T4.co13Emp06 = '1' AND T4.co13CodPro = '16998' AND +> T1.es10datlan >= '2003-02-01'::date ) AND ( T1.es10datlan >= +> '2003-02-01'::date) AND ( T3.fi08MovEst = 'S' ) AND ( T4.es10empa = '1' OR +> ( '1' = 0 ) ) AND ( T4.es10codalm = '0' OR T4.es10almtra = '0' OR ( '0' +> = 0 ) ) AND ( T1.es10datlan <= '2003-02-28'::date ) ORDER BY +> T4.co13Emp06, T4.co13CodPro, T1.es10datlan, T4.es10empa, T4.es10codalm, +> T4.es10almtra, T1.es10codemp, T1.es10tipdoc, T1.fi08codigo, +> T1.es10numdoc, T1.es10item; + +Your CASE tool isn't doing you any favors, is it :-(. + +Mostly you need to rearrange the JOIN order into something more efficient. +I'd guess that joining T1 to T4, then to T3, then to T2 would be the +way to go here. Also, some study of the WHERE conditions proves that +all the LEFT JOINs could be reduced to plain joins, because any +null-extended row will get discarded by WHERE anyway. That would be a +good thing to do to give the planner more flexibility. + +PG 7.4 will be better prepared to handle this sort of query, but I don't +think it will realize that the T1/T2 left join could be reduced to a +plain join given these conditions (that requires observing that null T2 +will lead to null T3 because of the join condition... hmmm, I wonder how +practical that would be...). Without that deduction, the key step of +deciding to join T1/T4 first isn't reachable. + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 17:58:36 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FE24475CEE + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:58:35 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A64FA475C15 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:58:34 -0500 (EST) +Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h2VMwW2L025847; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:58:32 -0500 (EST) +To: "alexandre :: aldeia digital" +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Subject: Re: 30-70 seconds query... +In-reply-to: <25610.1049149040@sss.pgh.pa.us> +References: <10846.200.225.202.15.1049145207.squirrel@webmail.ad2.com.br> + <25610.1049149040@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Comments: In-reply-to Tom Lane + message dated "Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:17:20 -0500" +Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:58:32 -0500 +Message-ID: <25846.1049151512@sss.pgh.pa.us> +From: Tom Lane +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-26.0 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/207 +X-Sequence-Number: 1505 + +I said: +> PG 7.4 will be better prepared to handle this sort of query, but I don't +> think it will realize that the T1/T2 left join could be reduced to a +> plain join given these conditions + +I take that back --- actually, the algorithm used in CVS tip *does* +deduce that all these left joins can be plain joins. + +Don't suppose you'd like to experiment with a current snapshot to see +how well it does for you? + + regards, tom lane + + +From pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Mon Mar 31 18:48:08 2003 +X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org +Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC94475AA9 + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:48:07 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mail1.ihs.com (mail1.ihs.com [170.207.70.222]) + by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCEC547580B + for ; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:48:06 -0500 (EST) +Received: from css120.ihs.com (css120.ihs.com [170.207.105.120]) + by mail1.ihs.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h2VNkhWU019100; + Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:46:43 -0700 (MST) +Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:44:32 -0700 (MST) +From: "scott.marlowe" +To: Tom Lane +Cc: "alexandre :: aldeia digital" , + +Subject: Re: 30-70 seconds query... +In-Reply-To: <25846.1049151512@sss.pgh.pa.us> +Message-ID: +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII +X-MailScanner: Found to be clean +X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: +X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-31.7 required=5.0 + tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, + REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_PINE autolearn=ham version=2.50 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) +X-Archive-Number: 200303/208 +X-Sequence-Number: 1506 + +On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Tom Lane wrote: + +> I said: +> > PG 7.4 will be better prepared to handle this sort of query, but I don't +> > think it will realize that the T1/T2 left join could be reduced to a +> > plain join given these conditions +> +> I take that back --- actually, the algorithm used in CVS tip *does* +> deduce that all these left joins can be plain joins. +> +> Don't suppose you'd like to experiment with a current snapshot to see +> how well it does for you? + +Think we can get the authors of the case tool that started this to include +it? :-) + +