You can subscribe to this list here.
2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(6) |
Sep
|
Oct
(19) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2011 |
Jan
(12) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
(4) |
May
(32) |
Jun
(12) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(3) |
Nov
|
Dec
(10) |
2012 |
Jan
(11) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(25) |
May
(53) |
Jun
(38) |
Jul
(103) |
Aug
(54) |
Sep
(31) |
Oct
(66) |
Nov
(77) |
Dec
(20) |
2013 |
Jan
(91) |
Feb
(86) |
Mar
(103) |
Apr
(107) |
May
(25) |
Jun
(37) |
Jul
(17) |
Aug
(59) |
Sep
(38) |
Oct
(78) |
Nov
(29) |
Dec
(15) |
2014 |
Jan
(23) |
Feb
(82) |
Mar
(118) |
Apr
(101) |
May
(103) |
Jun
(45) |
Jul
(6) |
Aug
(10) |
Sep
|
Oct
(32) |
Nov
|
Dec
(9) |
2015 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(9) |
Aug
(4) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2016 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2017 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(3) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(4) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
1
(15) |
2
(10) |
3
(2) |
4
(6) |
5
|
6
(1) |
7
(23) |
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
(2) |
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
(2) |
17
(2) |
18
|
19
|
20
(1) |
21
(2) |
22
(3) |
23
(2) |
24
(5) |
25
(2) |
26
(3) |
27
(4) |
28
(6) |
29
(9) |
30
(3) |
31
|
From: Josh B. <jo...@ag...> - 2014-05-20 16:23:58
|
On 04/29/2014 12:38 PM, Aaron Jackson wrote: > When I load data into my table "detail" with COPY, the table loads at a rate of about 56k rows per second. The data is distributed on a key to achieve this rate of insert (width is 678). However, when I do the following: > > INSERT INTO DETAIL SELECT 123 as Id, ... FROM DETAIL WHERE Id = 500; > > I see the write performance drop to only 2.5K rows per second. The total data set loaded from Id = 500 is 200k rows and takes about 7s to load into the data coordinator. So, I can attribute almost all of the time (about 80 seconds) directly to the insert. > > Insert on detail (cost=0.00..10.00 rows=1000 width=678) (actual time=79438.038..79438.038 rows=0 loops=1) > Node/s: node_pgs01_1, node_pgs01_2, node_pgs02_1, node_pgs02_2 > Node expr: productid > -> Data Node Scan on detail "_REMOTE_TABLE_QUERY_" (cost=0.00..10.00 rows=1000 width=678) (actual time=3.917..2147.231 rows=200000 loops=1) > Node/s: node_pgs01_1, node_pgs01_2, node_pgs02_1, node_pgs02_2 > > IMO, it seems like an insert like this should approach the performance of a COPY. Am I missing something or can you recommend a different approach? Well, COPY is much faster on vanilla Postgres, for a variety of optimization reasons. I don't see why PostgresXC would be different. Admittedly, the 20X differential is higher than single-node Postgres, so that seems worth investigating. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com |