Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] Partioning tsearch2 a table into chunks and accessing via views

2007-08-25 Thread Joshua D. Drake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Benjamin Arai wrote: This kind of disappointing, I was hoping there was more that could be done. There has to be another way to do incremental indexing without loosing that much performance. What makes you think you are loosing performance by

Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] Partioning tsearch2 a table into chunks and accessing via views

2007-08-25 Thread Benjamin Arai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 As stated in the previous email if I use partitioning then queries will be executed sequentially - i.e., instead of log(n) it would be (# partitions) * log(n). Right? Benjamin On Aug 25, 2007, at 9:18 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: -BEGIN

Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] Partioning tsearch2 a table into chunks and accessing via views

2007-08-25 Thread Brandon Shalton
As stated in the previous email if I use partitioning then queries will be executed sequentially - i.e., instead of log(n) it would be (# partitions) * log(n). Right? depends.. since indexes would be hit for each child table, the time for query is dependent on the amount of data that

Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] Partioning tsearch2 a table into chunks and accessing via views

2007-08-25 Thread Joshua D. Drake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Benjamin Arai wrote: As stated in the previous email if I use partitioning then queries will be executed sequentially - i.e., instead of log(n) it would be (# partitions) * log(n). Right? The planner will consider every relevant partition during

Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] Partioning tsearch2 a table into chunks and accessing via views

2007-08-25 Thread Benjamin Arai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Since I am using tsearch2 on the table I think there is going to be a significant performance hit - e.g., I partition by batch (batches are not separated by date, they are essentially random subsets of a much larger data-set). I am querying

Re: [PERFORM] Partioning tsearch2 a table into chunks and accessing via views

2007-08-25 Thread Erik Jones
On Aug 24, 2007, at 7:41 PM, Benjamin Arai wrote: Hi, I have an application which loads millions of NEW documents each month into a PostgreSQL tsearch2 table. I have the initial version completed and searching performance is great but my problem is that each time a new month rolls around

Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] Partioning tsearch2 a table into chunks and accessing via views

2007-08-25 Thread Erik Jones
On Aug 25, 2007, at 2:58 PM, Erik Jones wrote: On Aug 24, 2007, at 7:41 PM, Benjamin Arai wrote: Hi, I have an application which loads millions of NEW documents each month into a PostgreSQL tsearch2 table. I have the initial version completed and searching performance is great but my

[PERFORM] Shared memory usage

2007-08-25 Thread Max Zorloff
Hello. I have a postgres 8.0 and ~400mb database with lots of simple selects using indexes. I've installed pgpool on the system. I've set num_init_children to 5 and here is the top output. One of postmasters is my demon running some insert/update tasks. I see that they all use cpu heavily,

Re: [PERFORM] [GENERAL] Shared memory usage

2007-08-25 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 01:22:58AM +0400, Max Zorloff wrote: Hello. I have a postgres 8.0 and ~400mb database with lots of simple selects using indexes. I've installed pgpool on the system. I've set num_init_children to 5 and here is the top output. One of postmasters is my demon

Re: [PERFORM] [GENERAL] Shared memory usage

2007-08-25 Thread Max Zorloff
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 00:39:52 +0400, Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 01:22:58AM +0400, Max Zorloff wrote: Hello. I have a postgres 8.0 and ~400mb database with lots of simple selects using indexes. I've installed pgpool on the system. I've set

Re: [PERFORM] [GENERAL] Shared memory usage

2007-08-25 Thread Max Zorloff
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 00:39:52 +0400, Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 01:22:58AM +0400, Max Zorloff wrote: Hello. shared_memory is used for caching. It is filled as stuff is used. If you're not using all of it that means it isn't needed. Remember, it