| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Stephan Vollmer <svollmer(at)gmx(dot)de>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Creation of tsearch2 index is very slow |
| Date: | 2006-01-20 17:14:35 |
| Message-ID: | 25127.1137777275@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> The cost on inserting would generally go to either penalty, or
> picksplit. Certainly if you're inserting lots of values in a short
> interval, I can imagine picksplit being nasty, since the algorithms for
> a lot of datatypes are not really reknown for their speed.
Tut tut ... in the words of the sage, it is a capital mistake to
theorize in advance of the data. You may well be right, but on the
other hand it could easily be something dumb like an O(N^2) loop over
a list structure.
I'll post some gprof numbers after Stephan sends me the dump. We
should probably move the thread to someplace like pgsql-perform, too.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tino Wildenhain | 2006-01-20 17:21:19 | Re: what am I doing wrong with this query? |
| Previous Message | Tony Caduto | 2006-01-20 17:12:33 | what am I doing wrong with this query? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-01-20 17:20:26 | Re: SELECT MIN, MAX took longer time than SELECT COUNT, MIN, MAX |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-01-20 17:12:14 | Re: Autovacuum / full vacuum (off-topic?) |