pg.ddx.io pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feed From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: WIP: Fast GiST index build
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 11:59:11 +0300
Message-ID: <4E5F495F.2010303@enterprisedb.com> (raw )
In-Reply-To: <CAPpHfdu=BUTTqk-t04DrqTyWH1MHH2JPJZwsNLjbDAk8SH5EyQ@mail.gmail.com >
References: <BANLkTikgOQ1+r=A9b08szNTeEWsk-cNMMg@mail.gmail.com >
<CAPpHfdvi5WZKdRD+s60R+pdm8dLczRQ5_RYt4L8OA_bhorPjpg@mail.gmail.com >
<4E42DFCE.3050904@enterprisedb.com >
<CAPpHfdvhoYKUUCVaC-yFbDaE5j2QTa94cVgYuKnzX4xwWUjSTg@mail.gmail.com >
<CA+TgmoZoON6aAE3NB9=GF9oAdF=Kkz21+MmoE5P_kA9aKN-OQA@mail.gmail.com >
<CAPpHfdu4DusbHtMLE+csQJj61rMg_JtFOGSwrQVoOF5wPBkixQ@mail.gmail.com >
<CAPpHfdtMe6yizpbT+Lsx0mWSW9thPV9KosSrUsSEMNRBHUWUPw@mail.gmail.com >
<4E4AAC49.7070401@enterprisedb.com >
<CAPpHfduTY5FqYdA_AB2zQ5MYyaeEqc5fRLLPgGBOymDXu16gFQ@mail.gmail.com >
<4E4AC0B9.8070203@enterprisedb.com >
<4E4AC1C3.4070003@enterprisedb.com >
<CAPpHfdtAcs9UujarOUJdJR2-uPczBbaegooAa3vYwM6q5zVBBQ@mail.gmail.com >
<CAPpHfdu80rXcNHZ9gen-qA4sZc0bQAKS9hEU_EP5GRqWN4F0Ng@mail.gmail.com >
<4E569D9A.4020308@enterprisedb.com >
<CAPpHfdsoHciGGearBYQv8+J5L=Eni3mzJ0qjHpq3jb+BjzzYGg@mail.gmail.com >
<4E5CA88C.50008@enterprisedb.com >
<CAPpHfdu=BUTTqk-t04DrqTyWH1MHH2JPJZwsNLjbDAk8SH5EyQ@mail.gmail.com >
On 30.08.2011 13:38, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Heikki Linnakangas<
> heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks. Meanwhile, I hacked together my own set of test scripts, and let
>> them run over the weekend. I'm still running tests with ordered data, but
>> here are some preliminary results:
>>
>> testname | nrows | duration | accesses
>> -----------------------------+**-----------+-----------------+**----------
>> points unordered auto | 250000000 | 08:08:39.174956 | 3757848
>> points unordered buffered | 250000000 | 09:29:16.47012 | 4049832
>> points unordered unbuffered | 250000000 | 03:48:10.999861 | 4564986
>>
>> As you can see, the results are very disappointing :-(. The buffered builds
>> take a lot *longer* than unbuffered ones. I was expecting the buffering to
>> be very helpful at least in these unordered tests. On the positive side, the
>> buffering made index quality somewhat better (accesses column, smaller is
>> better), but that's not what we're aiming at.
>>
>> What's going on here? This data set was large enough to not fit in RAM, the
>> table was about 8.5 GB in size (and I think the index is even larger than
>> that), and the box has 4GB of RAM. Does the buffering only help with even
>> larger indexes that exceed the cache size even more?
>>
> This seems pretty strange for me. Time of unbuffered index build shows that
> there is not bottleneck at IO. That radically differs from my
> experiments. I'm going to try your test script on my test setup.
> While I have only express assumption that random function appears to be
> somewhat bad. Thereby unordered dataset behave like the ordered one. Can you
> rerun tests on your test setup with dataset generation on the backend like
> this?
> CREATE TABLE points AS (SELECT point(random(), random() FROM
> generate_series(1,10000000));
So I changed the test script to generate the table as:
CREATE TABLE points AS SELECT random() as x, random() as y FROM
generate_series(1, $NROWS);
The unordered results are in:
testname | nrows | duration | accesses
-----------------------------+-----------+-----------------+----------
points unordered buffered | 250000000 | 05:56:58.575789 | 2241050
points unordered auto | 250000000 | 05:34:12.187479 | 2246420
points unordered unbuffered | 250000000 | 04:38:48.663952 | 2244228
Although the buffered build doesn't lose as badly as it did with more
overlap, it still doesn't look good :-(. Any ideas?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
view thread (114+ messages) latest in thread
Message-ID: <4E5F495F.2010303@enterprisedb.com>
Permalink: ../4E5F495F.2010303@enterprisedb.com/
Also on: postgresql.org/message-id/4E5F495F.2010303@enterprisedb.com
copy link · copy postgr.es
reply Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com, aekorotkov@gmail.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com
Subject: Re: WIP: Fast GiST index build
In-Reply-To: <4E5F495F.2010303@enterprisedb.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox