Re: What's faster? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From D'Arcy J.M. Cain
Subject Re: What's faster?
Date
Msg-id 200312270552.07823.darcy@druid.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to What's faster?  ("Keith Bottner" <kbottner@comcast.net>)
Responses Re: What's faster?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
On December 26, 2003 07:11 pm, Keith Bottner wrote:
> I have a database where the vast majority of information that is related to
> a customer never changes. However, there is a single field (i.e. balance)
> that changes potentially tens to hundreds of times per day per customer
> (customers ranging in the 1000s to 10000s). This information is not
> indexed. Because Postgres requires VACUUM ANALYZE more frequently on
> updated tables, should I break this single field out into its own table,
> and if so what kind of a speed up can I expect to achieve. I would be
> appreciative of any guidance offered.

We went through this recently.  One thing we found that may apply to you is
how many fields in the client record have a foreign key constraint.  We find
that tables with lots of FKeys are a lot more intensive on updates.  In our
case it was another table, think of it as an order or header table with a
balance, that has over 10 million records.  Sometimes we have 200,000
transactions a day where we have to check the balance.  We eventually moved
every field that could possibly be updated on a regular basis out to separate
tables.  The improvement was dramatic.

--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net>   |  Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: What's faster?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: What's faster?