From: | Jeff Frost <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Daniel Caune <daniel(dot)caune(at)ubisoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Power cut and performance problem |
Date: | 2006-03-21 15:49:24 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.64.0603210747020.969@discord.dyndns.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Daniel Caune wrote:
> For example, the execution of the following query is fast as it used to
> be (gslog_event_id is the primary key on gslog_event):
>
> select max(gslog_event_id) from gslog_event; (=> Time: 0.773 ms)
>
>
> while the following query is really slow (several minutes):
>
> select min(gslog_event_id) from gslog_event; (index on the primary key
> is taken)
>
>
> I'm not a hardware expert at all, but I supposed that the whole
> performance would be degraded when a problem occurs with RAID disks. Am
> I wrong? Could it be something else? Are there some tools that check
> the state of a PostgreSQL database?
You would be correct, a hardware problem should manifest itself on both those
queries. What is the explain analyze output of those two queries? It's
possible you have a corrupt index on gslog_event. If that's the case, a
reindex would likely remedy the problem. Is postgres logging any errors?
--
Jeff Frost, Owner <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>
Frost Consulting, LLC http://www.frostconsultingllc.com/
Phone: 650-780-7908 FAX: 650-649-1954
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Caune | 2006-03-21 16:13:58 | Re: Power cut and performance problem |
Previous Message | Aftab Alam | 2006-03-21 15:17:40 | Re: Referential integrity broken (8.0.3), sub-select help |