Yes, you are right. Performance become even more awful.
Can some techniques from pg_bulkload be implemented in postgres core?
Current performance is not suitable for any enterprise-wide production system.
2011/8/5 Віталій Тимчишин <tivv00@gmail.com>:
>
> In my tests it greatly depends on if index writes are random or sequential.
> My test time goes down from few hours to seconds if I add to the end of
> index.
> As for me, best comparision would be to make two equal int4 columns with
> same data as in int8, two indexes, then perform the test. My bet it will be
> slower than int8.
>
> Четвер, 4 серпня 2011 р. користувач Robert Ayrapetyan
> <robert.ayrapetyan@comodo.com> написав:
>> All you are saying disproves following:
>>
>> in experiment I replaces bigint index:
>>
>> CREATE INDEX ix_t_big ON test.t USING btree (id_big) TABLESPACE tblsp_ix;
>>
>> with 4 (!) other indexes:
>>
>>>> If you look at the rest of my mail - you would notice 50 times
>>>> difference in performance.
>>>> What you would say?
>>>
>>> That accessing a page from RAM is more than 50 times as fast as a
>>> random access of that page from disk.
>>>
>>> -Kevin
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ayrapetyan Robert,
>> Comodo Anti-Malware Data Processing Analysis and Management System
>> (CAMDPAMS)
>> http://repo-qa.camdpams.odessa.office.comodo.net/mediawiki/index.php
>>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Vitalii Tymchyshyn
>
--
Ayrapetyan Robert,
Comodo Anti-Malware Data Processing Analysis and Management System (CAMDPAMS)
http://repo-qa.camdpams.odessa.office.comodo.net/mediawiki/index.php
