| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, pgsql-performance(at)postgreSQL(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Extremely slow intarray index creation and inserts. | 
| Date: | 2009-03-18 03:24:59 | 
| Message-ID: | 1804.1237346699@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance | 
Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> writes:
> vm=# create index "gist70000" on tmp_intarray_test using GIST (my_int_array gist__int_ops);
> CREATE INDEX
> Time: 2069836.856 ms
> Is that expected, or does it sound like a bug to take over
> half an hour to index 70000 rows of mostly 5 and 6-element
> integer arrays?
I poked at this example with oprofile.  It's entirely CPU-bound AFAICT,
and the CPU utilization is approximately
	55%	g_int_compress
	35%	memmove/memcpy (difficult to distinguish these)
	 1%	pg_qsort
	<1%	anything else
Probably need to look at reducing the number of calls to g_int_compress
... it must be getting called a whole lot more than once per new index
entry, and I wonder why that should need to be.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-03-18 07:48:38 | Re: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4 | 
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-03-18 00:43:23 | Re: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4 |