bedrockconstruction@xxxxxxxxx (Mark Makarowsky) writes:
> I have a table with 4,889,820 records in it. The
> table also has 47 fields. I'm having problems with
> update performance. Just as a test, I issued the
> following update:
>
> update valley set test='this is a test'
>
> This took 905641 ms. Isn't that kind of slow? There
> aren't any indexes, triggers, constraints or anything
> on this table. The version of Postgres is "PostgreSQL
> 8.2.4 on i686-pc-mingw32, compiled by GCC gcc.exe
> (GCC) 3.4.2 (mingw-special)". The operating
> environment is Windows 2003 Standard Edition w/service
> pack 2. It is 2.20 Ghz with 1.0 GB of RAM. Here is
> the results from Explain:
>
> "Seq Scan on valley (cost=0.00..1034083.57
> rows=4897257 width=601)"
>
> Here are the settings in the postgresql.conf. Any
> ideas or is this the expected speed?
Hmm.
- You asked to update 4,889,820 records.
- It's a table consisting of 8.5GB of data (based on the cost info)
For this to take 15 minutes doesn't seem particularly outrageous.
--
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "acm.org")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/oses.html
Rules of the Evil Overlord #65. "If I must have computer systems with
publically available terminals, the maps they display of my complex
will have a room clearly marked as the Main Control Room. That room
will be the Execution Chamber. The actual main control room will be
marked as Sewage Overflow Containment." <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
