It doesn't look like it's related to autovacuum. I re-ran the test against the two solaris boxes with autovacuum turned off and the results look about the same.
8.3.7 - Solaris 10 11/06 s10x_u3wos_10 X86 real 0m43.662s user 0m0.001s sys 0m0.003s real 0m43.565s user 0m0.001s sys 0m0.003s real 0m43.742s user 0m0.001s sys 0m0.003s 8.4rc1 - Solaris 10 11/06 s10x_u3wos_10 X86 real 0m59.304s user 0m0.001s sys 0m0.003s real 0m58.653s user 0m0.001s sys 0m0.003s real 1m0.253s user 0m0.001s sys 0m0.003s 8.3.7 - Solaris 10 8/07 s10x_u4wos_12b X86 real 0m38.981s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s real 0m39.879s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s real 0m39.111s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s 8.4rc1 - Solaris 10 8/07 s10x_u4wos_12b X86 real 0m50.647s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s real 0m49.453s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s real 0m49.725s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s Alan On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes: > > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> I am unable to duplicate any slowdown on this test case. > > > [ Kevin can ] > > It'd be useful first off to figure out if it's a CPU or I/O issue. > Is there any visible difference in vmstat output? Also, try turning > off autovacuum in both cases, just to see if that's related. > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > > >
