| From: | Chris Mair <list(at)1006(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SOLVED: insertion of bytea |
| Date: | 2005-10-31 14:29:17 |
| Message-ID: | 1130768957.6383.37.camel@dell.1006.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> I'm CPU-bound with an I/O well below what my disks could do :(
> [...]
>
> PS1: someone off-list suggested using oprofile, which I will do.
I've used oprofile and found out that with my test client (lots of
bytea inserts) the server burns a lot of CPU time in pglz_compress.
I'm using random data and my production data will be closed to random
(due to noise!), so compression is of course pointless.
By using
alter table dbtest alter img set storage external;
I can tell the server not to compress.
On a test box this brought net insert rate up by 50%,
which is enough to meet the requirements.
Thanks again :)
Bye, Chris.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kelly Burkhart | 2005-10-31 17:12:05 | 8.x index insert performance |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-31 14:24:10 | Re: performance of implicit join vs. explicit conditions on inet queries? |