Received: from localhost (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.204.191])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1A849FA363
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:30:35 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 26084-02 for
	<pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:30:28 -0400 (AST)
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 561AA9FA173
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:30:28 -0400 (AST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kBFJUQGO020793;
	Fri, 15 Dec 2006 14:30:26 -0500 (EST)
To: "Steven Flatt" <steven.flatt@gmail.com>
cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Insertion to temp table deteriorating over time 
In-reply-to: <357fa7590612151121x5f95102fj21a96b1bdc7eb002@mail.gmail.com> 
References: <357fa7590612130844q58ef3ca5q31e164f9b006e0fc@mail.gmail.com>
	<13032.1166052447@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<357fa7590612141240t55e70695q770a05a68a67536c@mail.gmail.com>
	<25209.1166131396@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<357fa7590612150821i3eca3f66ge2ced1ee20fa2dac@mail.gmail.com>
	<11651.1166202586@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<357fa7590612150955g1b9c733duaf000c23d28aa8af@mail.gmail.com>
	<12508.1166206006@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<357fa7590612151026t4ae033f6w5367cac9d0b67064@mail.gmail.com>
	<13947.1166209788@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<357fa7590612151121x5f95102fj21a96b1bdc7eb002@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Steven Flatt" <steven.flatt@gmail.com>
	message dated "Fri, 15 Dec 2006 14:21:01 -0500"
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 14:30:26 -0500
Message-ID: <20792.1166211026@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200612/428
X-Sequence-Number: 22484

"Steven Flatt" <steven.flatt@gmail.com> writes:
> I've been trying to reproduce the problem for days now :).  I've done pretty
> much exactly what you describe below, but I can't reproduce the problem on
> any of our lab machines.  Something is indeed special in this environment.

Yuck.  You could try strace'ing the problem backend and see if anything
is visibly different between fast and slow operation.  I don't suppose
you have oprofile on that machine, but if you did it'd be even better.

			regards, tom lane