Greg, On 10/30/06 7:09 AM, "Spiegelberg, Greg" <gspiegelberg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I broke that file into 2 files each of 550K rows and performed 2 > simultaneous COPY's after dropping the table, recreating, issuing a sync > on the system to be sure, &c and nearly every time both COPY's finish in > 12 seconds. About a 20% gain to ~91K rows/second. > > Admittedly, this was a pretty rough test but a 20% savings, if it can be > put into production, is worth exploring for us. Did you see whether you were I/O or CPU bound in your single threaded COPY? A 10 second "vmstat 1" snapshot would tell you/us. With Mr. Workerson (:-) I'm thinking his benefit might be a lot better because the bottleneck is the CPU and it *may* be the time spent in the index building bits. We've found that there is an ultimate bottleneck at about 12-14MB/s despite having sequential write to disk speeds of 100s of MB/s. I forget what the latest bottleneck was. - Luke
