| From: | PFC <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Arshavir Grigorian" <ag(at)m-cam(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres on RAID5 |
| Date: | 2005-03-12 02:20:18 |
| Message-ID: | opsnh534mcth1vuj@localhost |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Look for the possibility that a foreign key check might not be using an
index. This would yield a seq scan for each insertion, which might be your
problem.
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:22:56 -0500, Arshavir Grigorian <ag(at)m-cam(dot)com>
wrote:
> Many thanks for all the response.
>
> I guess there are a lot of things to change and tweak and I wonder what
> would be a good benchmarking sample dataset (size, contents).
>
> My tables are very large (the smallest is 7+ mil records) and take
> several days to load (if not weeks). It would be nice to have a sample
> dataset that would be large enough to mimic my large datasets, but small
> enough to load in a short priod of time. Any suggestions?
>
>
> Arshavir
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Kirpa | 2005-03-12 02:21:29 | Re: Postgres on RAID5 |
| Previous Message | PFC | 2005-03-12 02:15:21 | Re: Questions about 2 databases. |