On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:59 PM, David Wilson <david.t.wilson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The best bet is to issue an "analyze table" (with your table name in
> > there, of course) and see if that helps. Quite often the real issue
> > is that pgsql is using a method to insert rows when you have 10million
> > of them that made perfect sense when you had 100 rows, but no longer
> > is the best way.
> >
>
> This has caused the behavior to be... erratic. That is, individual
> copies are now taking anywhere from 2 seconds (great!) to 30+ seconds
> (back where we were before). I also clearly can't ANALYZE the table
> after every 4k batch; even if that resulted in 2 second copies, the
> analyze would take up as much time as the copy otherwise would have
> been. I could conceivably analyze after every ~80k (the next larger
> unit of batching; I'd love to be able to batch the copies at that
> level but dependencies ensure that I can't), but it seems odd to have
> to analyze so often.
Normally, after the first 50,000 or so the plan won't likely change
due to a new analyze, so you could probably just analyze after 50k or
so and get the same performance. If the problem is a bad plan for the
inserts / copies.
also, non-indexed foreign keyed fields can cause this problem.
