X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2088C9DCBD6 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:51:21 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10112-06 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:51:24 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4A879DCDAA for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:51:18 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k2E1pLlv012029; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 20:51:22 -0500 (EST) To: Chris cc: Frank Wiles , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: import performance In-reply-to: <44161F7D.9070707@gmail.com> References: <441610EB.7070001@gmail.com> <44161B46.5050801@gmail.com> <20060313193318.61709662.frank@wiles.org> <44161F7D.9070707@gmail.com> Comments: In-reply-to Chris message dated "Tue, 14 Mar 2006 12:42:21 +1100" Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 20:51:21 -0500 Message-ID: <12028.1142301081@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.112 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.112] X-Spam-Score: 0.112 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/181 X-Sequence-Number: 17618 Chris writes: > Tons of difference :/ Have you checked that the I/O performance is comparable? It seems possible that there's something badly misconfigured about the disks on your new machine. Benchmarking with "bonnie" or some such would be useful; also try looking at "iostat 1" output while running the inserts on both machines. Also, are the inserts just trivial "insert values (... some constants ...)" or is there more to it than that? regards, tom lane