Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Michael Stone
Subject Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?
Date
Msg-id 20051005094125.GW2241@mathom.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
List pgsql-performance
On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 06:19:41PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>COPY TO /dev/null WITH binary
>13MB/s    55% user 45% system  (ergo, CPU bound)
[snip]
>the most expensive. But it does point out that the whole process is
>probably CPU bound more than anything else.

Note that 45% of that cpu usage is system--which is where IO overhead
would end up being counted. Until you profile where you system time is
going it's premature to say it isn't an IO problem.

Mike Stone


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Richard Huxton
Date:
Subject: Re: Query in SQL statement
Next
From: Michael Stone
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?