Re: Updates on large tables are extremely slow

I just dropped 19 of the 21 indexes. I just left the primary key
constraint and my unique index on 3 fields ...
I did a vacuum full and an analyse .... I just ran the query again
some 20 minutes ago.

Guess what .... It's still running !!

So it's not that much faster for the moment.
I just want to update a single field in one table with a simple value
(negative value of another field)
That can not be that hard ...

Or is it the MVCC that is responsible for this ?

It can't be indexes on other tables, right ?
That would be absolutely sick

On 13 Jun 2005, at 18:45, Yves Vindevogel wrote:

> Ok, if all 21 are affected, I can understand the problem.
> But allow me to say that this is a "functional error"
>
> On 13 Jun 2005, at 18:02, Richard Huxton wrote:
>
>> Yves Vindevogel wrote:
>>> I forgot cc
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>> From: Yves Vindevogel <yves(dot)vindevogel(at)implements(dot)be>
>>>> Date: Mon 13 Jun 2005 17:45:19 CEST
>>>> To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Updates on large tables are extremely slow
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but if I update one column, why should PG update 21 indexes ?
>>>> There's only one index affected !
>>
>> No - all 21 are affected. MVCC creates a new row on disk.
>>
>> --
>> Richard Huxton
>> Archonet Ltd
>>
>>
> Met vriendelijke groeten,
> Bien à vous,
> Kind regards,
>
> Yves Vindevogel
> Implements
>
> <Pasted Graphic 2.tiff>
>
> Mail: yves(dot)vindevogel(at)implements(dot)be - Mobile: +32 (478) 80 82 91
>
> Kempische Steenweg 206 - 3500 Hasselt - Tel-Fax: +32 (11) 43 55 76
>
> Web: http://www.implements.be
>
> First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you.
> Then you win.
> Mahatma Ghandi.
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Bien à vous,
Kind regards,

Yves Vindevogel
Implements