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 649249DC81E for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 08:14:55 -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 22155-04 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 08:14:56 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mail.logix-tt.com (serval.logix-tt.com [213.239.221.42]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0565D9DCC89 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 08:14:50 -0400 (AST) Received: from kingfisher.intern.logix-tt.com (Md470.m.pppool.de [89.49.212.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.logix-tt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17AB824400F; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 13:14:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kingfisher.intern.logix-tt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468A5181C209A; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 13:14:55 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <43E1F7BF.2050100@logix-tt.com> Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:14:55 +0100 From: Markus Schaber Organization: Logical Tracking and Tracing International AG, Switzerland User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051017) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Stone Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Where is my bottleneck? References: <43D67496.2020203@androme.es> <20060130110047.GB9976@mathom.us> In-Reply-To: <20060130110047.GB9976@mathom.us> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.128 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.128] X-Spam-Score: 0.128 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200602/38 X-Sequence-Number: 17024 Hi, Michael, Michael Stone wrote: >> I have a performance problem and I don't know where is my bottleneck. > > [snip] > >> Most of the time the idle value is even higher than 60%. > > It's generally a fairly safe bet that if you are running slow and your > cpu is idle, your i/o isn't fast enough. Or the query is misoptimized (low work_mem, missing indices) and cause much more I/O than necessary. HTH, Markus -- Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org