Re: tsearch2/GIST performance factors?

From: "Craig A(dot) James" <cjames(at)modgraph-usa(dot)com>
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: tsearch2/GIST performance factors?
Date: 2005-10-18 06:07:55
Message-ID: 4354913B.2020001@modgraph-usa.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Oleg wrote:
> Did you consider *decreasing* SIGLENINT ? Size of index will diminish
> and performance could be increased. I use in current project SIGLENINT=15

The default value for SIGLENINT actually didn't work at all. It was only by increasing it that I got any performance at all. An examination of the GIST indexes showed that most of the first level and many of the second level bitmaps were saturated.

> tsearch2's index is a lossy index, read
> http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/oddmuse/index.cgi/Tsearch_V2_internals
> so search results should be rechecked !

Yes, thanks. We do indeed recheck the actual results. The tests I'm running are just on the raw index performance - how long does it take to "select ... where dockeys @@ to_tsquery(...)".

> We have our TODO http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/oddmuse/index.cgi/todo
> and hope to find sponsorhips for fts project for 8.2 release.
> Unfortunately, I didn't find spare time to package tsearchd for you,
> it should certainly help you.

At this point we may not have time to try tsearchd, and unfortunately we're not in a position to sponsor anything yet.

My original question is still bothering me. Is it normal for a keyword that occurs in more than about 2% of the documents to cause such inconsistent performance? Is there any single thing I might look at that would help improve performance (like, do I need more memory? More shared memory? Different config parameters?)

Thanks,
Craig

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleg Bartunov 2005-10-18 06:20:43 Re: tsearch2/GIST performance factors?
Previous Message Mark Kirkwood 2005-10-18 01:58:48 Re: Bytea poor performance