Received: from localhost (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0F149FB947 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:56:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 38979-04 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:56:35 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B6499FB72F for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:56:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l5J2upKm014293; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:56:51 -0400 (EDT) To: Karl Wright cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access In-reply-to: <4676DD57.7070304@metacarta.com> References: <4676DD57.7070304@metacarta.com> Comments: In-reply-to Karl Wright message dated "Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:30:31 -0400" Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:56:51 -0400 Message-ID: <14291.1182221811@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200706/322 X-Sequence-Number: 25355 Karl Wright writes: > - At any given time, there are up to 100 of these operations going on at > once against the same database. It sounds like your hardware is far past "maxed out". Which is odd since tables with a million or so rows are pretty small for modern hardware. What's the CPU and disk hardware here, exactly? What do you see when watching vmstat or iostat (as appropriate for OS, which you didn't mention either)? regards, tom lane