Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 660BE6325F4 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:05:33 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 80068-02 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:05:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx01.bfk.de (mx01.bfk.de [193.227.124.2]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B5156323AF for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:02:52 -0400 (AST) Received: from mx00.int.bfk.de ([10.119.110.2]) by mx01.bfk.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) id 1NVh8q-0007N9-Gr; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:02:48 +0000 Received: by bfk.de with local id 1NVh8r-00042i-UM; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:02:49 +0000 To: "fkater\@googlemail.com" Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Inserting 8MB bytea: just 25% of disk perf used? References: <20100114142903.GB2973@comppasch2> <82aawgoh09.fsf@mid.bfk.de> <20100114212719.GE2384@comppasch2> From: Florian Weimer Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:02:49 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20100114212719.GE2384@comppasch2> (fkater@googlemail.com's message of "Thu\, 14 Jan 2010 22\:27\:19 +0100") Message-ID: <82hbqnkd7a.fsf@mid.bfk.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.599 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201001/326 X-Sequence-Number: 37206 > Florian Weimer: > >> > Do you have any further idea why 16MB/s seems to be the limit here? >>=20 >> BYTEA deserialization is very slow, and this could be a factor here. >> Have you checked that you are in fact I/O bound? > > Could you elaborate that a bit? It sounds interesting but I > do not get what you mean by: > > "bytea deserialization": Do you mean from an escaped string > back to real binary data? Yes, that is what I meant. > Does that apply to my case (I use PGexecParam and have the Format > arg set to 1, binary) ? Yes, this was my suggestion. There is probably some other issue, then. > "I/O bound": What do you mean by that? You should check (presumably using the Windows performance monitoring tools, but I'm not familiar with Windows) if the PostgreSQL process is indeed waiting on disk I/O. --=20 Florian Weimer BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/ Kriegsstra=DFe 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1 D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99