From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Shelby Cain <alyandon(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgresql 8.0 beta 1 - strange cpu usage statistics and slow vacuuming |
Date: | 2004-08-19 17:09:07 |
Message-ID: | 324.1092935347@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Shelby Cain <alyandon(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> I'm putting 8.0 through its paces and here are a few
> things I've noticed on the native win32 port running
> on my workstation (2.0g p4 w/256 megs of ram).
> Here is the output of "vacuum verbose item":
> DETAIL: CPU -1.-1612s/-1.99u sec elapsed 1434.79 sec.
> ...
> CPU 1081264882.-821s/0.02u sec elapsed 1682.87 sec.
Hmm ... something broken about getrusage() on Windows?
CC'd to pgsql-hackers-win32 for comment.
> My other concern is the length of time that vacuum
> runs when cost based vacuuming is disabled.
Are you sure you had cost-based vac disabled? I tried to reproduce
your experiment here. I saw some degradation in vacuuming speed
but not nearly as large as you're reporting (85 vs 73 seconds),
and as far as I could tell it was still maxing out my disk.
But the behavior you're describing is exactly what I'd expect if
cost-based vac was on.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joe Conway | 2004-08-19 17:10:29 | Re: [HACKERS] SRPM for 8.0.0 beta? |
Previous Message | Mark Gibson | 2004-08-19 16:38:18 | Forwarding kerberos credentials |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mario Ivankovits | 2004-08-19 17:50:32 | InitDB Failure on install |
Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2004-08-19 16:46:38 | tablespace and pg_dump/restore |