Merlin Moncure wrote:
On 8/29/06, Willo van der Merwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and it has 743321 rows and a explain analyze select count(*) from
property_values;
you have a number of options:
All good ideas and I'll be sure to implement them later.
I am curious why you need to query the
Currently the load looks like this:
Cpu0 : 96.8% us, 1.9% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi, 1.0% si
Cpu1 : 97.8% us, 1.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi, 0.3% si
Cpu2 : 96.8% us, 2.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi, 0.3% si
Cpu3 : 96.2% us,
Rusty Conover wrote:
On Aug 29, 2006, at 7:52 AM, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Hi,
We're running PostgreSQL 8.1.4 on CentOS 4 (Linux version
2.6.9-34.0.1.ELsmp). Hardware specs:
2x AMD Dual-Core Opteron 270 Italy 1Ghz HT 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket 940
4 GB Registered ECC PC3200 DDR RAM
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Currently the load looks like this:
Cpu0 : 96.8% us, 1.9% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi, 1.0% si
Cpu1 : 97.8% us, 1.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi, 0.3% si
Cpu2 : 96.8% us, 2.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi, 0.3% si
Cpu3
AM
To: Luke Lonergan
Cc: Merlin Moncure; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] PostgreSQL performance issues
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Currently the load looks like this:
Cpu0 : 96.8% us, 1.9% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi,
1.0% si
Cpu1 : 97.8% us, 1.6
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On 8/29/06, Willo van der Merwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and it has 743321 rows and a explain analyze select count(*) from
property_values;
you have a number of options:
All good ideas and I'll be sure to
?
- Luke
-Original Message-
From: Willo van der Merwe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 4:35 AM
To: Luke Lonergan
Cc: Merlin Moncure; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] PostgreSQL performance issues
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Currently the load
Alex Hayward wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On 8/29/06, Willo van der Merwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and it has 743321 rows and a explain analyze select count(*) from
property_values;
you have a number of options:
On 30-Aug-06, at 7:35 AM, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Currently the load looks like this:
Cpu0 : 96.8% us, 1.9% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0%
hi, 1.0% si
Cpu1 : 97.8% us, 1.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0%
hi, 0.3% si
Cpu2 : 96.8% us, 2.6%
Dave Cramer wrote:
On 30-Aug-06, at 7:35 AM, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Currently the load looks like this:
Cpu0 : 96.8% us, 1.9% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi,
1.0% si
Cpu1 : 97.8% us, 1.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
Title: Message
That's an
interesting situation. Your CPU's are pegged, and you're hardly doing any
IO. I wonder if there is some ineficient query, or if its just very high
query volume. Maybe you could try setting log_min_duration_statement to
try to track down the slowest of the queries.
Dave Dutcher wrote:
That's an interesting situation. Your CPU's are pegged, and you're
hardly doing any IO. I wonder if there is some ineficient query, or
if its just very high query volume. Maybe you could try setting
log_min_duration_statement to try to track down the slowest of the
On 8/30/06, Willo van der Merwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This was just an example. All queries have slowed down. Could it be that
I've reached some cut-off and now my disk is thrashing?
Currently the load looks like this:
Cpu0 : 96.8% us, 1.9% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 1.0%
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 03:48, Willo van der Merwe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rusty,
Good ideas and I've implemented some of them, and gained about 10%. I'm
still sitting on a load avg of about 60.
Any ideas on optimizations on my postgresql.conf, that might have an
effect?
If all of
am Tue, dem 29.08.2006, um 15:52:50 +0200 mailte Willo van der Merwe folgendes:
and it has 743321 rows and a explain analyze select count(*) from
property_values;
QUERY
PLAN
4 1/2 seconds for a count(*) ? This seems a bit rough - is there
anything else I can try to optimize my Database? You can imagine that
slightly more complex queries goes out the roof.
Well a couple of things.
1. You put all your money in the wrong place.. 1 hard drive!!??!!
2. What is your
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
4 1/2 seconds for a count(*) ? This seems a bit rough - is there
anything else I can try to optimize my Database? You can imagine that
slightly more complex queries goes out the roof.
Well a couple of things.
1. You put all your money in the wrong place.. 1 hard
4 1/2 seconds for a count(*) ?
Is this a real website query ? Do you need this query ?
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
am Tue, dem 29.08.2006, um 16:55:11 +0200 mailte Willo van der Merwe folgendes:
4 1/2 seconds for a count(*) ? This seems a bit rough - is there anything
else
Because of MVCC.
http://www.thescripts.com/forum/thread173678.html
http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/120.php
On Aug 29, 2006, at 7:52 AM, Willo van der Merwe wrote: Hi, We're running PostgreSQL 8.1.4 on CentOS 4 (Linux version 2.6.9-34.0.1.ELsmp). Hardware specs: 2x AMD Dual-Core Opteron 270 Italy 1Ghz HT 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket 940
4 GB Registered ECC PC3200 DDR RAM
SuperMicro Server-Class 1U AS1020S
On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 15:52 +0200, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
(cost=0.00..51848.56 rows=1309356 width=0)
It is going through way more number of rows than what is returned by the
count(*).
It appears that you need to VACUUM the table (not VACUUM ANALYZE).
---(end of
On 8/29/06, Willo van der Merwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and it has 743321 rows and a explain analyze select count(*) from
property_values;
you have a number of options:
1. keep a sequence on the property values and query it. if you want
exact count you must do some clever locking however.
22 matches
Mail list logo
