Re: 50K record DELETE Begins, 100% CPU, Never Completes 1 hour later

From: "Clay Luther" <claycle(at)cisco(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Pgsql-General (E-mail)" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 50K record DELETE Begins, 100% CPU, Never Completes 1 hour later
Date: 2003-09-11 20:20:27
Message-ID: F67EB38120F7BB4BB972C786095802070E340A@ipcbu-exchange.amer.unity.cisco.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

By 32K I meant:

sort_mem = 32768 # min 64, size in KB

Do you mean to say that this should be

sort_mem = 33554432

?

Thanks.

cwl

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 3:00 PM
> To: Clay Luther
> Cc: Pgsql-General (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] 50K record DELETE Begins, 100% CPU, Never
> Completes 1 hour later
>
>
> "Clay Luther" <claycle(at)cisco(dot)com> writes:
> > Sort_mem is 32K.
>
> Try more (like 32M). Particularly in 7.4, you can really
> hobble a query
> by starving it for sort memory (since that also determines whether
> hashtable techniques will be tried).
>
> regards, tom lane
>

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-09-11 20:26:33 Re: 50K record DELETE Begins, 100% CPU, Never Completes 1 hour later
Previous Message Marc G. Fournier 2003-09-11 20:05:07 Re: State of Beta 2