Michal Szymanski wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >(For the record, the reason you see nonlinear degradation is the
> >accumulation of tentatively-dead versions of the row, each of which has
> >to be rechecked by each later update.)
> >
> There is another strange thing. We have two versions of our test
> environment one with production DB copy and second genereated with
> minimal data set and it is odd that update presented above on copy of
> production is executing 170ms but on small DB it executing 6s !!!!
How are you vacuuming the tables?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.advogato.org/person/alvherre
"El conflicto es el camino real hacia la unión"
