X-Original-To: pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DBF19DC820 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:09:17 -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 11261-03 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:09:16 -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 228F19DC804 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:09:14 -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 k0KH9DhN025035; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:09:13 -0500 (EST) To: Stephan Vollmer cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Creation of tsearch2 index is very slow In-reply-to: <43D114B1.5030802@gmx.de> References: <43D0ED57.1020608@gmx.de> <17454.1137771321@sss.pgh.pa.us> <43D114B1.5030802@gmx.de> Comments: In-reply-to Stephan Vollmer message dated "Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:49:53 +0100" Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:09:13 -0500 Message-ID: <25034.1137776953@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.094 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.094] X-Spam-Score: 0.094 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200601/1010 X-Sequence-Number: 89955 Stephan Vollmer writes: > Unfortunately, I'm not able to investigate it further myself as I'm > quite a Postgres newbie. But I could provide someone else with the > example table. Maybe someone else could find out why it is so slow. I'd be willing to take a look, if you'll send me the dump file off-list. > I dropped all unnecessary columns and trimmed the table down to > 235,000 rows. The dumped table (compressed with RAR) is 7,1 MB. I > don't have a website to upload it but I could send it to someone via > e-mail. Don't have RAR --- gzip or bzip2 is fine ... regards, tom lane