-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:39:57 -0500 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Yeah, that... is beyond my abilities. Well reading it is anyway. I > > can provide any information people want though. Tom? Greg? Andrew? > > Somebody? What information do you want from me to help you track > > this down? > > The vmstat output you showed before said user CPU time was only around > 12%, which seems to destroy Luke's thesis that data conversion time > is the problem. IIRC we were speculating that data was being written > in a pattern that required a lot of seeking thus ruining throughput, > but we didn't have any hard evidence of that. Did you do the > strace'ing I suggested? Yes, I asked if you wanted counts or the whole output. You didn't answer :). I provided the counts. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00359.php I won't be able to run another test until this weekend :( but anything I have is yours. Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHvwqLATb/zqfZUUQRAl8tAJ0VmS6ffaFBq1a/UUYZxX9F84vcFgCgkhgl +UF5Zp59H/JIJa1/ZSKvuC4= =xw/k -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
