Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11C5E64FD30 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:18:49 -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 85033-09 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:18:40 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.228]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2E764FD20 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:18:45 -0300 (ADT) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so1775794rvf.43 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:18:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=yHeMtljpe0pT8p5+QARZKnrF8Fu+Pyfq3t101Sd2I0Q=; b=UreQnwTUhwe5K5r8/dnc4OeflGHFzCaFB9VZaLTKjBTGNcKNnilojybh6sxwQM3R8K bWPE7cpeLkiTIwE5uG9aUwZ/nG4GiJBa/dZR2rrNGLgrjETg7KKXcUvsllMt1cqBW6le HttxAJwhyot0BvqqHbTwpGXT7Fpqgx3RQYQ/8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=eDU12mopvBS3Q6R42UA++5cRzagrwkX7cN6UKRZO66D1pKlDg3G6XhWSDYBsXZiIuv EbqrOCLFEuNJ5G0xU9L4guduY8ObDS4UN8u+nRMPQQEXrFURQP69yMvPn9/QeYkspVVQ kR+PnkRa4v89Fg6rG5WKxrMILKR3bVRrwhpMk= Received: by 10.141.106.14 with SMTP id i14mr1359448rvm.178.1219540723719; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.197.1 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:18:43 -0600 From: "Scott Marlowe" To: "Loic Petit" Subject: Re: Large number of tables slow insert Cc: max@nts.biz.ua, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <1775c5ea0808231759x6b43520du4f949dbe25f4b316@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1775c5ea0808231759x6b43520du4f949dbe25f4b316@mail.gmail.com> 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: 200808/301 X-Sequence-Number: 31182 On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Loic Petit wrote: > 1 table contains about 5 indexes : timestamp, one for each sensor type - 3, > and one for packet counting (measures packet dropping) > (I reckon that this is quite heavy, but a least the timestamp and the values > are really usefull) But what's the update rate on these indexes and tables? I'm wondering if you're not vacuuming aggresively enough to keep up with bursty update patterns