From: | Alan Hodgson <ahodgson(at)simkin(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Update table performance |
Date: | 2007-08-07 16:03:49 |
Message-ID: | 200708070903.50096@hal.medialogik.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tuesday 07 August 2007 05:58, Mark Makarowsky
<bedrockconstruction(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
> I have a table with 4,889,820 records in it. The
> table also has 47 fields. I'm having problems with
> update performance. Just as a test, I issued the
> following update:
>
> update valley set test='this is a test'
>
> This took 905641 ms. Isn't that kind of slow?
PostgreSQL has to write a full new version of every row that gets updated.
Updates are, therefore, relatively slow.
I'm guessing you're doing this on a single SATA drive, too, which probably
doesn't help.
--
"If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom;
and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more,
it will lose that too." -- Somerset Maugham, Author
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Decibel! | 2007-08-07 17:59:14 | Re: Update table performance |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2007-08-07 14:53:31 | Re: Update table performance |