Re: Scaling 10 million records in PostgreSQL table - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Samuel Gendler
Subject Re: Scaling 10 million records in PostgreSQL table
Date
Msg-id CAEV0TzDCeAA1Tvej6rprk8agRcRPJk3DzmPVMDv+5dK99Z_55g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Scaling 10 million records in PostgreSQL table  (Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au>)
List pgsql-performance


On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au> wrote:

If you already have appropriate indexes and have used `explain analyze` to verify that the query isn't doing anything slow and expensive, it's possible the easiest way to improve performance is to set up async replication or log shipping to a local hot standby on real physical hardware, then do the query there.

I've run postgresql on medium instances using elastic block store for the storage and had no difficulty running queries like this one on tables of comparable (and larger) size. It might not come back in 10ms, but such queries weren't so slow that I would describe the wait as "a lot of time" either.  My guess is that this is a sequential scan on a 10 million record table with lots of bloat due to updates.  Without more info about table structure and explain analyze output, we are all just guessing, though.  Please read the wiki page which describes how to submit performance problems and restate your question.


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Craig James
Date:
Subject: Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance
Next
From: Claudio Freire
Date:
Subject: Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance