|
View:
New views
4 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
|
|
slony issues.I already asked this basic question on the slony mailing lists, but
they seem kinda quiet this week. So, I've got a database with about 30,000 objects in it, and running the setaddtable() function is taking about 30 seconds, and spinning a CPU 100% while doing it. Any suggestions on indexes, or changing functional costs to get this to run in a more reasonable time. I'm adding about 600 tables and 200 sequences, and with each table taking 30 seconds it's taking about 5 hours to create a set, which is just crazy to me. On a much slower machine but without the other 29,000 or so objects, each table takes around 5 to 10 seconds to add, which is still long, but not quite as long as on my production server. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general |
|
|
Re: slony issues.On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 09:23 -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> I already asked this basic question on the slony mailing lists, but > they seem kinda quiet this week. > > So, I've got a database with about 30,000 objects in it, and running > the setaddtable() function is taking about 30 seconds, and spinning a > CPU 100% while doing it. auto_explain may be able to help. It can automatically collect slow queries and provide explain analyze output, even for queries inside functions. Regards, Jeff Davis -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general |
|
|
Re: slony issues.On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@...> wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 09:23 -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote: >> I already asked this basic question on the slony mailing lists, but >> they seem kinda quiet this week. >> >> So, I've got a database with about 30,000 objects in it, and running >> the setaddtable() function is taking about 30 seconds, and spinning a >> CPU 100% while doing it. > > auto_explain may be able to help. It can automatically collect slow > queries and provide explain analyze output, even for queries inside > functions. Thanks I'll take a look. I'm afraid that I might not get much out of it if the cost is hidden by the function. But it's a start. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general |
|
|
Re: slony issues.On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 11:59 -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Thanks I'll take a look. I'm afraid that I might not get much out of > it if the cost is hidden by the function. But it's a start. You should be able to get the cost of any SPI executed in the function by using auto_explain.log_nested_statements. Other activity may be hidden, but I can't think of something else that a function in slony would spend a lot of time doing. Regards, Jeff Davis -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |