Are you running vacuum after each batch of updates? You should run a
vacuum full to start and then (in order to keep the table size from
growing out of control) you should tack on a "vacuum analyze my_table"
at the end of each series of updates. (I would do this on top of making
it all one query as someone else posted)
Robert Treat
On Thu, 2002-08-01 at 03:31, Xavier Bugaud wrote:
>
> > 1. Are you using transactions?
> > 2. Do you have an index on id?
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for answering...
>
> 1. I tried with and without transctions : same result. In the
> tests I make right now, I have disable transactions.
>
> 2. yes, a unique index.
>
> Each time I run a "VACUUM FULL", the process is very fast
> again for 6-7 times (10-15s). After that, it takes again
> about 2-3 minutes...
> When I only run a "VACUUM" (not FULL), it doesn't make any difference.
>
> --
> Xavier Bugaud
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
