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 BB2C49DCCB7
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:23:40 -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 09141-07
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:23:39 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from web35502.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web35502.mail.mud.yahoo.com
	[66.163.179.126])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 371159DCBD4
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:23:38 -0400 (AST)
Received: (qmail 8349 invoked by uid 60001); 22 Dec 2005 16:23:36 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.br;
	h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
	b=a3KDDqkE+epk0PtzTkuf37GSVJgrAUxcDwsFUggTx1ZKIDfRF/C0UAgEEtqMyxoPlVraU2ukZu8TlOwqfZuJ6FOjvH8Th4Se2t4subtpda5DTNeCcyHLYeqVo0DnkvnHQUtjzrvwKoZk5g7qM6mTD2qRhi8gfQKRgyGBi0IPcao=
	;
Message-ID: <20051222162336.8347.qmail@web35502.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Received: from [201.3.235.213] by web35502.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP;
	Thu, 22 Dec 2005 16:23:36 GMT
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 16:23:36 +0000 (GMT)
From: Carlos Benkendorf <carlosbenkendorf@yahoo.com.br>
Subject: Re: ORDER BY costs
To: Jan Dittmer <jdittmer@sfhq.hn.org>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <43AA6879.6070601@sfhq.hn.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1876667760-1135268616=:8327"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.527 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.047,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE=0.479, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
X-Spam-Score: 0.527
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200512/572
X-Sequence-Number: 16393

--0-1876667760-1135268616=:8327
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


Jan Dittmer <jdittmer@sfhq.hn.org> escreveu:  What is your work_mem setting? I think the default is 1MB which is
probably too low as your trying to sort roughly 150000*100Bytes = 15MB.

Jan

  I think you would like to say 150000*896Bytes... Am I right? My default work_mem is 2048 and I changed to 200000... and pgsql_tmp directory is not used any more...but... 
   
  Now the new numbers:
   
  Sort  (cost=132929.22..133300.97 rows=148701 width=896) (actual time=3949.663..4029.618 rows=167710 loops=1)
   Sort Key: anocalc, cadastro, codvencto, parcela
   ->  Index Scan using pk_arript, pk_arript, pk_arript, pk_arript on arript  (cost=0.00..120154.28 rows=148701 width=896) (actual time=0.166..829.260 rows=167710 loops=1)
         Index Cond: (((anocalc = 2005::numeric) AND (cadastro = 19::numeric) AND (codvencto = 0::numeric) AND (parcela >= 0::numeric)) OR ((anocalc = 2005::numeric) AND (cadastro = 19::numeric) AND (codvencto > 0::numeric)) OR ((anocalc = 2005::numeric) AND (cadastro > 19::numeric)) OR (anocalc > 2005::numeric))
 Total runtime: 4184.723 ms
(5 rows)

   
  It is less than with work_mem set to 2000 but is it worthly? I´m afraind of swapping... are not those settings applied for all backends?
   
  Benkendorf
   
   

		
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! doce lar. Faça do Yahoo! sua homepage.
--0-1876667760-1135268616=:8327
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<DIV id=RTEContent><BR><B><I>Jan Dittmer &lt;jdittmer@sfhq.hn.org&gt;</I></B> escreveu:  <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">What is your work_mem setting? I think the default is 1MB which is<BR>probably too low as your trying to sort roughly 150000*100Bytes = 15MB.<BR><BR>Jan<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>  <DIV>I think you would like to say 150000*896Bytes... Am I right? My default work_mem is 2048 and I changed to 200000... and pgsql_tmp directory is not used any more...but... </DIV>  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>  <DIV>Now the new numbers:</DIV>  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>  <DIV>Sort&nbsp; (cost=132929.22..133300.97 rows=148701 width=896) (actual time=3949.663..4029.618 rows=167710 loops=1)<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; Sort Key: anocalc, cadastro, codvencto, parcela<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp; -&gt;&nbsp; Index Scan using pk_arript, pk_arript, pk_arript, pk_arript on arript&nbsp; (cost=0.00..120154.28 rows=148701 width=896) (actual time=0.166..829.260 rows=1677
 10
 loops=1)<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Index Cond: (((anocalc = 2005::numeric) AND (cadastro = 19::numeric) AND (codvencto = 0::numeric) AND (parcela &gt;= 0::numeric)) OR ((anocalc = 2005::numeric) AND (cadastro = 19::numeric) AND (codvencto &gt; 0::numeric)) OR ((anocalc = 2005::numeric) AND (cadastro &gt; 19::numeric)) OR (anocalc &gt; 2005::numeric))<BR>&nbsp;Total runtime: 4184.723 ms<BR>(5 rows)<BR></DIV>  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>  <DIV>It is less than with work_mem set to 2000 but is it worthly? I´m afraind of swapping... are not those settings applied for all backends?</DIV>  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>  <DIV>Benkendorf</DIV>  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><p>
		<hr size=1> 
Yahoo! doce lar. <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/br/tagline/homepage_set/*http://br.yahoo.com/homepageset.html">Faça do Yahoo! sua homepage.</a>
--0-1876667760-1135268616=:8327--