Message-ID: <4846F7F1.1050408@mansionfamily.plus.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 21:15:45 +0100
From: James Mansion <james@mansionfamily.plus.com>
Organization: MsgWare
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>
CC: andrew klassen <aptklassen@yahoo.com>,
 pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: insert/update tps slow with indices on table > 1M rows
References: <691681.3510.qm@web37304.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0806041127350.3987@aragorn.flymine.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0806041127350.3987@aragorn.flymine.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> If you're running a "work queue" architecture, that probably means you 
> only have one thread doing all the updates/inserts? It might be worth 
> going multi-threaded, and issuing inserts and updates through more 
> than one connection. Postgres is designed pretty well to scale 
> performance by the number of simultaneous connections.
That would explain a disappointing upper limit on insert rate, but not 
any sort of cliff for the rate.  Nor, really, any material slowdown, if 
the single thread implies that we're stuck on round trip latency as a 
material limiting factor.

James