On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 07:33:51AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 4:11 PM, AP wrote:
> > mdstash=# select * from pgstathashindex('link_datum_id_idx');
> > version | bucket_pages | overflow_pages | bitmap_pages | unused_pages |
> > live_item
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 01:12:25PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:41 AM, AP wrote:
> > The index is 135GB rather than 900GB (from memory/give or take).
>
> Whoa. Big improvement.
Not a good direct comparison in general but it fits my workload.
The 900GB
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 04:32:29PM +1000, AP wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 04:41:24PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > (On another note, I committed these patches.)
> >
> > Thanks.
>
> Seconded. :)
>
> Now uploading data with fillfactor of 90. I'll
.
I compiled (as apt.postgresql.org does not provide the latest
beta3 version for stretch; only sid which has a different perl
version) 10~beta3~20170805.2225-1~593.git0d1f98b.
AP
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgr
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 08:21:01AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Note - AP has off list shared the data dump and we (Ashutosh Sharma
> and me) are able to reproduce the problem and we could see that if we
> force vacuum via the debugger, then it is able to free overflow pages.
> The e
getting anywhere near that and am tempted to chuck it all in, eat
the 3-4x disk space cost and go back to btree which'd cost me terrabytes.
AP
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 05:58:25PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 8:22 AM, AP wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 05:19:59PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> I think if you are under development, it is always advisable to create
> >> indexes after init
be of benefit.
Unless I am being /so/ unusual that it's not worth it. :)
I'll reply to the rest in a separate stream as I'm still poking other
work related things atm so can't do the debug testing as yet.
AP
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 07:31:39PM +1000, AP wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 08:23:20PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 3:57 AM, AP wrote:
> > > The data being indexed is BYTEA, (quasi)random and 64 bytes in size.
> > > The table has over 2 billi
On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 12:38:38PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 9:32 AM, AP wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 08:52:03AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:40 AM, AP wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 05:52
On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 08:52:03AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:40 AM, AP wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 05:52:32PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> >> > version | bucket_pages | overflow_pages | bitmap_pages |
> >> >>
---
4095.8750
(1 row)
If you need more info or whatnot, shout. I've a problematic index to
play with now.
> [1] -
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b970f20f-f096-2d3a-6c6d-ee887bd30cfb%402ndquadrant.fr
AP
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 08:23:20PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 3:57 AM, AP wrote:
> > The data being indexed is BYTEA, (quasi)random and 64 bytes in size.
> > The table has over 2 billion entries. The data is not unique. There's
> > an average
On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 03:33:45PM +1000, AP wrote:
> > Do you have any deletes? How have you verified whether autovacuum has
>
> No DELETEs. Just the initial COPY, then SELECTs, then a DB rename to get it
> out of the way of other testing, then the REINDEX.
>
> > been
1.273241+10 |0 |0 |
0 | 2
So it appears not.
# show autovacuum;
autovacuum
on
(1 row)
All autovacuum parameters are as per default. The autovacuum launcher process
exists.
:(
AP
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 08:10:10AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 4:27 PM, AP wrote:
> > There is one index that caused an issue. Towards the end of an import
> > I got the following error:
> >
> > out of overflow pages in hash index
> >
&g
then COMMIT. There is
one transaction per connection. The whole process can take 12-15 hours
and involves 1000 transactions.
Hopefully it's not a specific set of random values that generates
the error cos duplicating THAT will be outpaced by the death of the
universe. :)
AP
--
Sent via pgsql-hacke
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 08:44:15PM +0100, Geoff Winkless wrote:
> On 21 September 2016 at 13:29, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I'd be curious what benefits people expect to get.
>
> An edge case I came across the other day was a unique index on a large
> string: postgresql popped up and told me that I c
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:50:13PM +1200, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> >I'm rather unenthused about having a hash index implementation that's
> >mildly better in some corner cases, but otherwise doesn't have much
> >benefit. That'll mean we'll have to step up our user education a lot,
> >and we'll have t
19 matches
Mail list logo
