Thanks for the link!
Alternatively, when I am trying to create an index on a column of a table
which is of size 400 GB, it is taking roughly 7 hrs. The index is created
only on one column which is not a primary key. The query I am using is,
create index on table (colname). I request your valuable
On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 4:34 PM, Srinivas Karthik V
wrote:
> @Peter: I was indexing the primary key of all the tables in tpc-ds. Some of
> the fact tables has multiple columns as part of the primary key. Also, most
> of them are numeric type.
Please see my mail to -hackers on suffix truncation:
ht
On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 6:27 AM Craig Ringer wrote:
>
> You can also gain a bit by running with wal_level = minimal. On newer
> version you can use UNLOGGED tables then convert them to logged, but that
> won't be an option for 9.4.
>
Curious to know more on this does with standby also its faster
@Peter: I was indexing the primary key of all the tables in tpc-ds. Some of
the fact tables has multiple columns as part of the primary key. Also, most
of them are numeric type.
On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 7:09 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
> wrote:
From: Peter Geoghegan [mailto:p...@bowt.ie]
> What kind of data was indexed? Was it a bigserial primary key, or
> something else?
Sorry, I don't remember it. But the table was for storing some machine usage
data, and I don't think any sequence was used in the index.
According to my faint memory
On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
wrote:
> 400 GB / 15 hours = 7.6 MB/s
>
> That looks too slow. I experienced a similar slowness. While our user tried
> to INSERT (not COPY) a billion record, they reported INSERTs slowed down by
> 10 times or so after inserting about 500 mil
From: Srinivas Karthik V [mailto:skarthikv.i...@gmail.com]
> I was using copy command to load. Removing the primary key constraint on
> the table and then loading it helps a lot. In fact, a 400GB table was loaded
> and the primary constraint was added in around 15 hours. Thanks for the
> wonderful
On 30 June 2018 at 06:47, Srinivas Karthik V
wrote:
> I was using copy command to load. Removing the primary key constraint on
> the table and then loading it helps a lot. In fact, a 400GB table was
> loaded and the primary constraint was added in around 15 hours. Thanks for
> the wonderful sugg
I was using copy command to load. Removing the primary key constraint on
the table and then loading it helps a lot. In fact, a 400GB table was
loaded and the primary constraint was added in around 15 hours. Thanks for
the wonderful suggestions.
Regards,
Srinivas Karthik
On 28 Jun 2018 2:07 a.m.,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 6:25 AM, Pavel Stehule
wrote:
>
>
>> Other parameters are set to default value. Moreover, I have specified the
>> primary key constraint during table creation. This is the only possible
>> index being created before data loading and I am sure there are no other
>> indexes
Hi
I suggest to split the data to insert into several text files (
the number of CPUs) , create extension pg_background, and create a main
transaction which calls x (number of CPUs) autonomous transactions.
Each one insert the data from a specific test file via the
2018-06-27 13:18 GMT+02:00 Srinivas Karthik V :
> Hi,
> I am performing a bulk insert of 1TB TPC-DS benchmark data into PostgreSQL
> 9.4. It's taking around two days to insert 100 GB of data. Please let me
> know your suggestions to improve the performance. Below are the
> configuration parameters
12 matches
Mail list logo
