2011/1/25 Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Jeremy Palmer <JPalmer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Kevin I've now clustered the table. And the performance did >> increase quite a bit. > > Yeah, that's enough to notice the difference. > >> My only question is how often will I need to re-cluster the table, >> because it comes at quite a cost. The setup I'm running will mean >> that 10,000 new rows will be inserted, and 2,500 rows will be >> updated on this table each day. > > You're going to see performance drop off as the data fragments. > You'll need to balance the performance against maintenance > down-time. I would guess, though, that if you have a weekly > maintenance window big enough to handle the CLUSTER, it might be > worth doing it that often. Was FILLFACTOR already suggested regarding the INSERT vs UPDATE per day ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/sql-altertable.html (and index too, but they already have a default at 90% for btree) > > -Kevin > > -- > Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance > -- Cédric Villemain 2ndQuadrant http://2ndQuadrant.fr/ ; PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
