From: | Adriaan van Os <postgres(at)microbizz(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: TRUNCATE TABLE |
Date: | 2007-07-18 07:36:45 |
Message-ID: | 469DC30D.3060603@microbizz.nl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Thus the timing issue (at least as exhibited by this script) has nothing
> whatever to do with the time to delete a file, but with the time to
> create one. Since the part of DROP being timed has probably got no I/O
> involved at all (the tuples being touched are almost surely still in
> shared buffers), it's unsurprising that it is consistently fast.
In my original profiling, CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE/DROP TABLE wasn't much faster than TRUNCATE TABLE.
When I try it again now, I see that DROP TABLE is consistently fast, while the timings of CREATE
TEMPORARY TABLE vary as much as those of TRUNCATE TABLE. Your observations on the time needed to
open a file confirm that, I think.
In my test databases, autovacuum is off.
Regards,
Adriaan van Os
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-07-18 08:57:15 | Re: importance of fast disks with pg |
Previous Message | Ron Mayer | 2007-07-17 22:29:32 | ionice to make vacuum friendier? |