From: | Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Herouth Maoz <herouth(at)unicell(dot)co(dot)il> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slow update |
Date: | 2009-02-09 13:07:07 |
Message-ID: | 2f4958ff0902090507p34ae66f0ha6255d461521c3f6@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Herouth Maoz <herouth(at)unicell(dot)co(dot)il> wrote:
> I hope someone can clue me in based on the results of explain analyze.
Did you have a chance to run vmstat on it, and post it here ? Maybe -
if db resides on the same disc with everything else, something
(ab)uses that much io, and it has to wait.
Also, I don't know - but personaly I didn't like the line in explain:
-> Bitmap Index Scan on billing_msisdn_sme_reference
(cost=0.00..24.70 rows=389 width=0) (actual time=2
1.418..21.418 rows=252 loops=151332)
Index Cond: ((b.msisdn)::text =
(("substring"((rb.msisdn)::text, 1, 0) || '972'::text) || "substrin
g"((rb.msisdn)::text, 2)))
But the cost is next to none, so that's not it.
--
GJ
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Raul Carolus | 2009-02-09 14:12:51 | Strange thing happened when upgrading postgres on windows on my laptop |
Previous Message | Herouth Maoz | 2009-02-09 12:50:41 | Re: Slow update |