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 3AE7C9DCC07 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:56:28 -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 72222-06 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:56:29 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0DEF9DCC21 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:56:25 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k2LLuPSi002263; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:56:25 -0500 (EST) To: Scott Marlowe cc: Ron , Mikael Carneholm , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Migration study, step 1: bulk write performance In-reply-to: <1142975962.17883.203.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> References: <7F10D26ECFA1FB458B89C5B4B0D72C2B088286@sesrv12.wirelesscar.com> <1142973890.24487.510.camel@localhost.localdomain> <7.0.1.0.2.20060320161133.03a0b5a8@earthlink.net> <1142975962.17883.203.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> Comments: In-reply-to Scott Marlowe message dated "Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:19:22 -0600" Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:56:25 -0500 Message-ID: <2262.1142978185@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.113 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113] X-Spam-Score: 0.113 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/431 X-Sequence-Number: 17868 Scott Marlowe writes: > I've also found that modest increases in commit_siblings and > commit_delay help a lot on certain types of imports. On a data import? Those really should have zero effect on a single-process workload. Or are you doing multiple concurrent imports? regards, tom lane