https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4400
Michael Alan Dorman <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #20 from Michael Alan Dorman <[email protected]> 2010-06-21 11:03:48 EDT --- > In summary: dropping the unnecessary index and swapping the fields > of a primary key (as suggested here) can save some unnecessary work > for the SQL server, and can save some space, but makes no difference > in SpamAssassin performance, at least in my case of a 200.000 token > database and a PostgreSQL 8.3.11 server. Hey, Mark, Thanks for addressing this---I've just never had the time to be able to set up a test rig to quantify the performance impact of my changes. Certainly it's a little disappointing that there were no visible performance increases. I guess the savings in disk IO were not enough to overcome the many other inefficiencies in the PostgreSQL code. In fact, last year I ended up more or less rewriting the postgresql bayes back-end to (almost) eliminate deadlocks (I would be curious if you are seeing them as frequently as we did under load) and use a number of different strategies to try to be more efficient, mostly having to do with changing quoting mechanisms and clarifying transaction handling. If you would be interested in testing these much more extensive changes, I would be happy to make them available to you for testing. That said, in the end I abandoned PgSQL as a bayes back-end for a CDB-based one, which has given us much higher performance, though at the cost of some constraints on updating. Mike. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
