X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF14B5283C for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 02:10:25 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28131-05 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 05:10:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from larry.aptalaska.net (larry.aptalaska.net [64.186.96.3]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF9EA52831 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 02:10:20 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.98.9] (rdbck-static-287.palmer.mtaonline.net [64.4.232.33]) (authenticated bits=0) by larry.aptalaska.net (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6T5NYQO005229 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:23:35 -0800 Message-ID: <42E9BA2F.1090900@aptalaska.net> Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:10:07 -0800 From: Matthew Schumacher User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gavin Sherry Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Performance problems testing with Spamassassin 3.1.0 References: <42E80C28.2040608@aptalaska.net> <1122532023.25574.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <42E9749F.6000709@aptalaska.net> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Bayes: Learn: ham X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 64.186.96.3 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200507/461 X-Sequence-Number: 13702 Gavin Sherry wrote: > > I had a look at your data -- thanks. > > I have a question though: put_token() is invoked 120596 times in your > benchmark... for 616 messages. That's nearly 200 queries (not even > counting the 1-8 (??) inside the function itself) per message. Something > doesn't seem right there.... > > Gavin I am pretty sure that's right because it is doing word statistics on email messages. I need to spend some time studying the code, I just haven't found time yet. Would it be safe to say that there isn't any glaring performance penalties other than the sheer volume of queries? Thanks, schu