Jesper Krogh wrote:
So what I see is that "top 10" takes < 1ms, top 50 takes over 500 times
more, and top 1000 only 1.5 times more than top 50.
What can the reason be for the huge drop between limit 10 and limit 50 be?
Normally this means you're hitting much higher performing cached
behavio
Jesper Krogh writes:
> I have a "message queue" table, that contains in the order of 1-10m
> "messages". It is implemented using TheSchwartz:
> http://search.cpan.org/~bradfitz/TheSchwartz-1.07/lib/TheSchwartz.pm
One way to approach queueing efficiently with PostgreSQL is to rely on
PGQ. New upco
Greg Williamson wrote:
> Jesper --
>
> I apologize for top-quoting -- a challenged reader.
>
> This doesn't directly address your question, but I can't help but
> notice that the estimates for rows is _wildly_ off the actual number
> in each and every query. How often / recently have you run ANAL
?
Are the timing results consistent over several runs ? It is possible that
caching effects are entering into the time results.
Greg Williamson
- Original Message
From: Jesper Krogh
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Sent: Fri, January 1, 2010 3:48:43 AM
Subject: [PERFORM] Message q
Hi.
I have a "message queue" table, that contains in the order of 1-10m
"messages". It is implemented using TheSchwartz:
http://search.cpan.org/~bradfitz/TheSchwartz-1.07/lib/TheSchwartz.pm
So when a "worker" picks the next job it goes into the "job" table an
select the top X highest priority mes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesper Krogh) writes:
> I have this "message queue" table.. currently with 8m+
> records. Picking the top priority messages seem to take quite
> long.. it is just a matter of searching the index.. (just as explain
> analyze tells me it does).
>
> Can anyone digest further optimiz
Jesper Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have this "message queue" table.. currently with 8m+ records. Picking
> the top priority messages seem to take quite long.. it is just a matter
> of searching the index.. (just as explain analyze tells me it does).
> Limit (cost=0.00..0.09 rows=1 w
Craig Ringer wrote:
Jesper Krogh wrote:
Hi.
I have this "message queue" table.. currently with 8m+ records.
Picking the top priority messages seem to take quite long.. it is just
a matter of searching the index.. (just as explain analyze tells me it
does).
Can anyone digest further optimi
Jesper Krogh wrote:
Hi.
I have this "message queue" table.. currently with 8m+ records. Picking
the top priority messages seem to take quite long.. it is just a matter
of searching the index.. (just as explain analyze tells me it does).
Can anyone digest further optimizations out of this ou
Hi.
I have this "message queue" table.. currently with 8m+ records. Picking
the top priority messages seem to take quite long.. it is just a matter
of searching the index.. (just as explain analyze tells me it does).
Can anyone digest further optimizations out of this output? (All records
h
10 matches
Mail list logo
