Hi,
yes it is vacuumed regulary once a day. And vacuum full is done once a week.
The reasons of the slow seq scan are those two stored procedures in the
field list (get_stock and get_stock_getup). These take 13-20 ms every time
thay executed. Multiplying with the nr of rows we get 11-18 sec.
It is strange that the laptop substantially faster then the server. The
get_stock* functions are executed 2-3 times faster. This is a reason, but I
think it isn't enough. There must be something more there. Next time I'll
try to run a fsck on the data partition. May be it will show something
wrong.
Thank you all.
Best regards,
-- Csaba Együd
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alvaro Herrera [mailto:alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl]
> Sent: 2004. június 27. 3:38
> To: Együd Csaba
> Cc: Pgsql-General@Postgresql.Org (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Performance problem on RH7.1
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 12:16:17PM +0200, Együd Csaba wrote:
>
> > I've a problem with the perfprmance of the production environment.
> > I've two db servers. One on my laptop computer (2Ghz, 1GB,
> WinXP, Cygwin,
> > Postgres 7.3.4) and one on a production server (2GHz, 1GB,
> Ultra SCSI,
> > RH7.1, Postgres 7.3.2).
> >
> > I run the same dump and the same query on both of the computers. The
> > difference is substantial.
> > The query takes 5 times longer on the production server
> then on the laptop.
>
> Are both databases properly vacuumed? Did you try a VACUUM FULL? I'm
> wondering why it takes a lot of time seqscanning the
> t_products table in
> the production server compared to the laptop.
>
> --
> Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
> "Hoy es el primer día del resto de mi vida"
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.707 / Virus Database: 463 - Release Date: 2004. 06. 15.
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.712 / Virus Database: 468 - Release Date: 2004. 06. 27.
