X-Original-To: pgsql-bugs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FBE528BB
	for <pgsql-bugs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  3 Jun 2005 04:09:04 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 59949-05
	for <pgsql-bugs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  3 Jun 2005 07:09:01 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from web50805.mail.yahoo.com (web50805.mail.yahoo.com
	[206.190.38.114])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 72132528A8
	for <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>; Fri,  3 Jun 2005 04:08:59 -0300 (ADT)
Received: (qmail 62048 invoked by uid 60001); 3 Jun 2005 07:09:00 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
	h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
	b=zWW389gXjecBw+2YZX8Us5l3ceqljEyg3pWwPB6YgbKiiYALI3Xfn74TL/qWq/JbYVGDtwxpzFbPjG5u9WW7OZKdl973K5LglUF2lUnHSUoVvChCgmgk/Gp5OCCHhH9z8R6MFz2uUvqFNac/lLB43tKQ+WGPcze5gR9gaGtPzSQ=
	;
Message-ID: <20050603070900.62046.qmail@web50805.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [195.33.105.17] by web50805.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP;
	Fri, 03 Jun 2005 00:09:00 PDT
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 00:09:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bahadur Singh <bahadursingh@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: BUG #1697: Select getting slower on continously updating data
To: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org, pgsql-novice@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <20050602130259.GB9716@wolff.to>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.969 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, DNS_FROM_RFC_POST
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200506/25
X-Sequence-Number: 11984



--- Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to> wrote:

> This does not belong on the pgsql-bugs list. The
> pgsql-novice or
> pgsql-performance lists seem more appropiate. I have
> set followups
> to the pgsql-novice list.
> 
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 12:05:00 +0100,
>   Bahadur Singh <bahadursingh@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I found situtation that, when I am selecting data
> from a table of 200
> > records, getting slower as I do continous update
> to the same existing data.
> 
> You need to be vacuuming (and possibly analyzing)
> the table more often as the
> updates will leave dead rows in the table which will
> bloat the table size and
> slow down access, particularly sequential scans. If
> the updates modify the
> data value distributions significantly, then you
> will also need to
> reanalyze the table to help the planner make good
> decisions.
> 

Many thanks for this tip !
But is this good idea to analyse/vacuuming the
database tables while updates are taking place..
Since, I update continuously say (100,000 ) times or
more the same data set.

This is the result of analyze command.

INFO:  analyzing "public.salesarticle"
INFO:  "salesarticle": scanned 3000 of 20850 pages,
containing 62 live rows and 134938 dead rows; 62 rows
in sample, 431 estimated total rows

Gesamtlaufzeit der Abfrage: 5531 ms.
Total Time Taken : 5531 ms.

Can you suggest me some clever way to so, because I
would prefer to do vaccumming while database is not
loaded with queries/transactions.

Regards
Bahadur



		
__________________________________ 
Discover Yahoo! 
Find restaurants, movies, travel and more fun for the weekend. Check it out! 
http://discover.yahoo.com/weekend.html