Re: external sort performance

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql(at)jamponi(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: external sort performance
Date: 2011-11-17 17:55:20
Message-ID: 27243.1321552520@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql(at)jamponi(dot)net> writes:
> This is on PG 8.4.8 on Linux, 16GB of "real" RAM.
> Most recently, I enabled trace_sort, disabled hash aggregation[1], and
> set a large work_mem (normally very small, in this case I tried
> anything from 8MB to 256MB. I even tried 1GB and 2GB).

FWIW, I think hash aggregation is your best shot at getting reasonable
performance. Sorting 175GB of data is going to hurt no matter what.

If the grouped table amounts to 5GB, I wouldn't have expected the hash
table to be more than maybe 2-3X that size (although this does depend on
what aggregates you're running...). Letting the hash aggregation have
all your RAM might be the best answer.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jon Nelson 2011-11-17 19:32:26 Re: external sort performance
Previous Message Craig James 2011-11-17 17:28:15 Re: external sort performance