Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBBB99FA433 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:52:59 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 61105-05 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:52:51 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from vms044pub.verizon.net (vms044pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.44]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69C2D9FBB58 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:52:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([72.66.0.236]) by vms044.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JH500BNBQG0ZA83@vms044.mailsrvcs.net> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:52:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id E21481F81C for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:52:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (osgiliath.home.mathom.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id wRmigLd247KT for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:52:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D4A4E1F814; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:52:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:52:45 -0400 From: Michael Stone Subject: Re: Usage up to 50% CPU In-reply-to: <4631C825.9000705@Sheeky.Biz> To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Mail-followup-to: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <20070427125242.GZ2422@mathom.us> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mathom.us X-Pgp-Fingerprint: 53 FF 38 00 E7 DD 0A 9C 84 52 84 C5 EE DF 7C 88 References: <20070427080653.GB12895@svr2.hagander.net> <20070427081350.GD12895@svr2.hagander.net> <4631C825.9000705@Sheeky.Biz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200704/463 X-Sequence-Number: 24340 On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 07:23:41PM +0930, Shane Ambler wrote: >I would think that as you are sitting and watching the cpu usage, your >query would seem to taking a while to run, leading me to wonder if you >are getting a full table scan that is causing pg to wait for disk response? If so, you probably wouldn't be seeing that much cpu usage... (if the cpu is waiting for disk it's idling) Mike Stone