From: | Tim Uckun <timuckun(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Running update in chunks? |
Date: | 2013-01-21 21:45:24 |
Message-ID: | CAGuHJrMSXQePXC0Lg6ztLO3ZADSBsdyr8gPHKZP4BrLPxK98hQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
>
> Nope.
If you have any suggestions I am all ears. For the purposes of this
discussion we can narrow down the problem this update statement.
Update imports set make_id = null.
There are 98K records in the table. There is no index on the make_id
field. Standard untouched postgresql.conf from the brew install of
postgres.
> Unlikely. Do you really think that a PostgreSQL installation typically runs
> 100 times slower on updates than inserts and every other user has just said
> "oh, that's ok then"? Or is it more likely that something peculiar is broken
> on your setup.
I really don't know. That's why I am here asking. I don't think
anything particular is broken with my system. As mentioned above the
setup is really simple. Standard postgres install, the default conf
file, update one field on one table. It takes fifty plus seconds.
I concede that if I was to go into the postgres.conf and make some
changes it will probably run faster (maybe much faster) but I wanted
to exhaust other factors before I went messing with the default
install.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tim Uckun | 2013-01-21 21:48:36 | Re: Running update in chunks? |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2013-01-21 21:45:02 | Re: Case insensitive collation |