Re: two memory-consuming postgres processes

From: Alexy Khrabrov <deliverable(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: two memory-consuming postgres processes
Date: 2008-05-02 21:30:17
Message-ID: 1F7A4C3D-C8A3-44BC-A324-E9BA409BB479@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On May 2, 2008, at 2:23 PM, Greg Smith wrote:

> On Fri, 2 May 2008, Alexy Khrabrov wrote:
>
>> I created several indices for the primary table, yes.
>
> That may be part of your problem. All of the indexes all are being
> updated along with the main data in the row each time you touch a
> record. There's some optimization there in 8.3 but it doesn't make
> index overhead go away completely. As mentioned already, the
> optimal solution to problems in this area is to adjust table
> normalization as much as feasible to limit what you're updating.

Was wondering about it, too -- intuitively I 'd like to say, "stop all
indexing" until the column is added, then say "reindex", is it
doable? Or would it take longer anyways? SInce I don't index on that
new column, I'd assume my old indices would do -- do they change
because of rows deletions/insertions, with the effective new rows
addresses?

Cheers,
Alexy

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PFC 2008-05-02 21:30:44 Re: two memory-consuming postgres processes
Previous Message Greg Smith 2008-05-02 21:23:45 Re: two memory-consuming postgres processes