| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tim Uckun <timuckun(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com>, Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Running update in chunks? |
| Date: | 2013-01-22 07:02:57 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1zEfWqz+Wj=FJPjXVuoiupLmZ7Rsd9PHwr1GiGQX1YMFg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Monday, January 21, 2013, Tim Uckun wrote:
> > First off, what does it say for rows affected? (Hint, if you really
> > are using a default configuration and it doesn't say 0 rows
> > affected, please show us the actual query used.)
>
> update imports set make_id = null
>
> Query returned successfully: 98834 rows affected, 49673 ms execution time.
>
>
> vacuum analyze imports
>
> Query returned successfully with no result in 4138 ms.
>
> VACUUM FULL imports;
>
What if you do:
alter table cars.imports set (fillfactor=50);
Before the vacuum full, and then try the update again?
Cheers,
Jeff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2013-01-22 07:07:02 | Re: Running update in chunks? |
| Previous Message | Gavan Schneider | 2013-01-22 06:33:00 | Re: Yet Another Timestamp Question: Time Defaults |