Re: Table UPDATE is too slow

From: "Steinar H(dot) Gunderson" <sgunderson(at)bigfoot(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Table UPDATE is too slow
Date: 2004-08-31 18:18:15
Message-ID: 20040831181815.GB24253@uio.no
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-performance

On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 11:11:02AM -0700, Ron St-Pierre wrote:
> We have a web based application with data that is updated daily. The
> biggest bottleneck occurs when we try to update
> one of the tables. This table contains 58,000 rows and 62 columns, and
> EVERY column is indexed.

That is usually a very bad idea; for every update, PostgreSQL has to update
62 indexes. Do you really do queries on all those 62 columns?

> A typical update is:
> UPDATE dataTable SET field01=44.5, field02=44.5, field03='Bob',
> field04='foo', ... , field60='2004-08-30', field61='2004-08-29'
> WHERE id = 1234;

That looks like poor database normalization, really. Are you sure you don't
want to split this into multiple tables instead of having 62 columns?

> Other notables:
> The UPDATE is run from a within a function: FOR rec IN SELECT ...LOOP
> RETURN NEXT rec; UPDATE dataTable.....
> Postgres 7.4.3
> debian stable
> 2 GB RAM
> 80 DB IDE drive (we can't change it)

Are you doing all this in multiple transactions, or in a sngle one? Wrapping
the FOR loop in a transaction might help speed.

/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron St-Pierre 2004-08-31 18:23:39 Re: Table UPDATE is too slow
Previous Message Thomas F.O'Connell 2004-08-31 18:16:22 Re: Table UPDATE is too slow

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron St-Pierre 2004-08-31 18:23:39 Re: Table UPDATE is too slow
Previous Message Thomas F.O'Connell 2004-08-31 18:16:22 Re: Table UPDATE is too slow