From: Rod Taylor <rbt@rbt.ca>
To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Optimizing DELETE
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 09:53:07 -0400
Message-ID: <1158673987.71040.24.camel@home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <450FEF1A.4070106@fer.hr>
References: <450FEF1A.4070106@fer.hr>
On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 15:22 +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
> I've just fired off a "DELETE FROM table" command (i.e. unfiltered
> DELETE) on a trivially small table but with many foreign key references
> (on similar-sized tables), and I'm waiting for it to finish. It's been
> 10 minutes now, which seems very excessive for a table of 9000 rows on a
> 3 GHz desktop machine.
I would guess that a few of those referenced tables are missing indexes
on the referenced column.
> 'top' says it's all spent in USER time, and there's a ~~500KB/s write
> rate going on. Just before this DELETE, I've deleted data from a larger
> table (50000 rows) using the same method and it finished in couple of
> seconds - maybe it's a PostgreSQL bug?
>
> My question is: assuming it's not a bug, how to optimize DELETEs?
> Increasing work_mem maybe?
>
> (I'm using PostgreSQL 8.1.4 on FreeBSD 6- amd64)
>
> (I know about TRUNCATE; I need those foreign key references to cascade)
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: rbt@rbt.ca, ivoras@fer.hr
Subject: Re: Optimizing DELETE
In-Reply-To: <1158673987.71040.24.camel@home>
* 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