From: | "Daniel J(dot) Luke" <dluke(at)geeklair(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Steinar H(dot) Gunderson" <sgunderson(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Getting even more insert performance (250m+rows/day) |
Date: | 2006-05-24 20:20:20 |
Message-ID: | 6D9B6E0B-21C3-4F2F-88AD-D097069E0220@geeklair.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On May 24, 2006, at 4:13 PM, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 04:09:54PM -0400, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>> no warnings in the log (I did change the checkpoint settings when I
>> set up the database, but didn't notice an appreciable difference in
>> insert performance).
>
> How about wal_buffers? Upping it might not help all that much if
> only one
> thread is writing, but you might give it a try...
I tried, but I didn't notice a difference.
I should probably emphasize that I appear to be CPU bound (and I can
double my # of rows inserted per second by removing the index on the
table, or half it by adding another index).
I really should run gprof just to verify.
--
Daniel J. Luke
+========================================================+
| *---------------- dluke(at)geeklair(dot)net ----------------* |
| *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* |
+========================================================+
| Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily |
| reflect the opinions of my employer. |
+========================================================+
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Larry Rosenman | 2006-05-24 20:24:20 | Re: Getting even more insert performance (250m+rows/day) |
Previous Message | Mark Lewis | 2006-05-24 20:18:32 | Re: Getting even more insert performance (250m+rows/day) |