Re: Slow count(*) again... - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Mladen Gogala
Subject Re: Slow count(*) again...
Date
Msg-id 4CB57159.2090501@vmsinfo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Slow count(*) again...  (Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>)
Responses Re: Slow count(*) again...  (Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>)
List pgsql-performance
  On 10/13/2010 3:19 AM, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> I think that major effect you are seeing here is that the UPDATE has
> made the table twice as big on disk (even after VACUUM etc), and it has
> gone from fitting in ram to not fitting in ram - so cannot be
> effectively cached anymore.
>
In the real world, tables are larger than the available memory. I have
tables of several hundred gigabytes in size. Tables shouldn't be
"effectively cached", the next step would be to measure "buffer cache
hit ratio", tables should be effectively used.

--
Mladen Gogala
Sr. Oracle DBA
1500 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(212) 329-5251
www.vmsinfo.com


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Mladen Gogala
Date:
Subject: Re: Slow count(*) again...
Next
From: Mark Kirkwood
Date:
Subject: Re: Slow count(*) again...