From: | Christopher Petrilli <petrilli(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PFC <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com>, Vivek Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Impact of checkpoint_segments under continual load conditions |
Date: | 2005-07-20 15:52:52 |
Message-ID: | 59d991c405072008523c6914bc@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 7/19/05, Christopher Petrilli <petrilli(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 7/19/05, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Christopher Petrilli <petrilli(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > > On 7/19/05, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > >> How *exactly* are you invoking psql?
> >
> > > It is a subprocess of a Python process, driven using a pexpect
> > > interchange. I send the COPY command, then wait for the '=#' to come
> > > back.
> >
> > Some weird interaction with pexpect maybe? Try adding "-n" (disable
> > readline) to the psql command switches.
>
> Um... WOW!
> It doesn't stay QUITE that low, but it stays lower... quite a bit.
> We'll see what happens over time.
here's a look at the difference:
http://blog.amber.org/diagrams/pgsql_readline_impact.png
I'm running additional comparisons AFTER clustering and analyzing the tables...
Chris
--
| Christopher Petrilli
| petrilli(at)gmail(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Petrilli | 2005-07-20 16:16:26 | Re: Impact of checkpoint_segments under continual load conditions |
Previous Message | Dirk Lutzebäck | 2005-07-20 15:25:09 | Optimizer seems to be way off, why? |