On 06/11/2012 09:02 AM, Mark Thornton wrote:
I didn't think the process was using even the 500m it ought to have had available, whereas creating an index did appear to use that much. Note though that I didn't stay up all night watching it!
You'd be surprised. If you look in your base/pgsql_tmp directory during a cluster of that table (make a copy of it if you don't want to interfere with a running system) you should see that directory fill with temporary structures, mostly during the index rebuild portions.
It also wouldn't hurt to bootstrap system cache with the contents of that table. Do an explain analyze on SELECT * with no where clause and all of that table should be in memory.
Oh, actually that reminds me... does your 10GB table fit into memory? If not, that might explain it right there.
-- Shaun Thomas OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604 312-444-8534 sthomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ______________________________________________ See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
