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 73AD552E5C for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:12:26 -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 92478-02 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:12:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from linuxworld.com.au (unknown [203.34.46.50]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0794252CC6 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:12:18 -0300 (ADT) Received: from linuxworld.com.au (IDENT:swm@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by linuxworld.com.au (8.13.2/8.13.2) with ESMTP id j6QCCMLl015654; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:12:22 +1000 Received: from localhost (swm@localhost) by linuxworld.com.au (8.13.2/8.13.2/Submit) with ESMTP id j6QCCL0o015651; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:12:22 +1000 X-Authentication-Warning: linuxworld.com.au: swm owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:12:21 +1000 (EST) From: Gavin Sherry X-X-Sender: swm@linuxworld.com.au To: Chris Isaacson Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: COPY insert performance In-Reply-To: <07774C6E31D94A44A2A60E2085944F09071DF0@tbmail.tradebot.com> Message-ID: References: <07774C6E31D94A44A2A60E2085944F09071DF0@tbmail.tradebot.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.002 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200507/381 X-Sequence-Number: 13622 Hi Chris, Have you considered breaking the data into multiple chunks and COPYing each concurrently? Also, have you ensured that your table isn't storing OIDs? On Mon, 25 Jul 2005, Chris Isaacson wrote: > #----------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > # RESOURCE USAGE (except WAL) > #----------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > shared_buffers = 65536 # min 16, at least max_connections*2, 8KB each shared_buffers that high has been shown to affect performance. Try 12000. > wal_buffers = 64 # min 4, 8KB each Increasing wal_buffers can also have an effect on performance. Thanks, Gavin