Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 913B864FCDC for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:25:36 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 67273-04 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:25:29 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from macnews.de (webmail.macnews.de [193.164.134.233]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 753B464FCD8 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:25:33 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [84.253.63.109] (account pl30411 HELO [192.168.113.215]) by macnews.de (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.11) with ESMTPA id 93308899 for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:25:31 +0200 Message-ID: <4884722A.1000405@apache.org> Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:25:30 +0200 From: Andreas Hartmann User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Less rows -> better performance? References: <48846A02.7090702@apache.org> <48846DA3.2090308@archonet.com> In-Reply-To: <48846DA3.2090308@archonet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200807/175 X-Sequence-Number: 30775 Richard, thanks for your reply! Richard Huxton schrieb: > Andreas Hartmann wrote: >> Dear PostgreSQL community, >> >> first some info about our application: >> >> - Online course directory for a University >> - Amount of data: complete dump is 27 MB >> - Semester is part of primary key in each table >> - Data for approx. 10 semesters stored in the DB >> - Read-only access from web application (JDBC) >> >> Our client has asked us if the performance of the application could be >> improved by moving the data from previous years to a separate "archive" >> application. > > If you had 27GB of data maybe, but you've only got 27MB - that's > presumably all sitting in memory. Here's some info about the actual amount of data: SELECT pg_database.datname, pg_size_pretty(pg_database_size(pg_database.datname)) AS size FROM pg_database where pg_database.datname = 'vvz_live_1'; datname | size ---------------+--------- vvz_live_1 | 2565 MB I wonder why the actual size is so much bigger than the data-only dump - is this because of index data etc.? > What in particular is slow? There's no particular bottleneck (at least that we're aware of). During the first couple of days after the beginning of the semester the application request processing tends to slow down due to the high load (many students assemble their schedule). The customer upgraded the hardware (which already helped a lot), but they asked us to find further approaches to performance optimiziation. -- Andreas -- Andreas Hartmann, CTO BeCompany GmbH http://www.becompany.ch Tel.: +41 (0) 43 818 57 01