From: | "David Wilson" <david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Rapidly decaying performance repopulating a large table |
Date: | 2008-04-23 00:18:17 |
Message-ID: | e7f9235d0804221718v6fb0e9edw3312d1555688e60a@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> What have you got shared_buffers set to? If it's not enough to cover
> the working set for your indexes, that might be the (other) problem.
>
shared_buffers = 1536MB
Is there a way to get the size of a specific index, on that note?
There seem to be access functions for the relation + indices, and for
the relation by itself, but not a specific index out of possibly
several. I could increase shared_buffers some, but client apps on the
same machine occasionally also have hefty memory requirements (not
during these regeneration runs, but it seems like restarting the
server with a new shared_buffers value before and after the
regeneration is a bit of overkill).
--
- David T. Wilson
david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2008-04-23 00:25:56 | Re: How to modify ENUM datatypes? |
Previous Message | Clemens Schwaighofer | 2008-04-23 00:01:40 | Re: Postgres Encoding conversion problem |