mirror of
https://git.postgresql.org/git/postgresql.git
synced 2024-12-15 08:20:16 +08:00
1005 lines
39 KiB
Plaintext
1005 lines
39 KiB
Plaintext
From owner-pgsql-hackers@hub.org Sun Jun 14 18:45:04 1998
|
|
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.47.148.200])
|
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA03690
|
|
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:45:00 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from localhost (majordom@localhost) by hub.org (8.8.8/8.7.5) with SMTP id SAA28049; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:39:42 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: by hub.org (TLB v0.10a (1.23 tibbs 1997/01/09 00:29:32)); Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:36:06 +0000 (EDT)
|
|
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.org (8.8.8/8.7.5) id SAA27943 for pgsql-hackers-outgoing; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:36:04 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from angular.illustra.com (ifmxoak.illustra.com [206.175.10.34]) by hub.org (8.8.8/8.7.5) with ESMTP id SAA27925 for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:35:47 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from hawk.illustra.com (hawk.illustra.com [158.58.61.70]) by angular.illustra.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA21293 for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:35:12 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Received: by hawk.illustra.com (5.x/smail2.5/06-10-94/S)
|
|
id AA07922; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:35:13 -0700
|
|
From: dg@illustra.com (David Gould)
|
|
Message-Id: <9806142235.AA07922@hawk.illustra.com>
|
|
Subject: [HACKERS] performance tests, initial results
|
|
To: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
|
|
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:35:13 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
|
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
|
Sender: owner-pgsql-hackers@hub.org
|
|
Precedence: bulk
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have been playing a little with the performance tests found in
|
|
pgsql/src/tests/performance and have a few observations that might be of
|
|
minor interest.
|
|
|
|
The tests themselves are simple enough although the result parsing in the
|
|
driver did not work on Linux. I am enclosing a patch below to fix this. I
|
|
think it will also work better on the other systems.
|
|
|
|
A summary of results from my testing are below. Details are at the bottom
|
|
of this message.
|
|
|
|
My test system is 'leslie':
|
|
|
|
linux 2.0.32, gcc version 2.7.2.3
|
|
P133, HX chipset, 512K L2, 32MB mem
|
|
NCR810 fast scsi, Quantum Atlas 2GB drive (7200 rpm).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Results Summary (times in seconds)
|
|
|
|
Single txn 8K txn Create 8K idx 8K random Simple
|
|
Case Description 8K insert 8K insert Index Insert Scans Orderby
|
|
=================== ========== ========= ====== ====== ========= =======
|
|
1 From Distribution
|
|
P90 FreeBsd -B256 39.56 1190.98 3.69 46.65 65.49 2.27
|
|
IDE
|
|
|
|
2 Running on leslie
|
|
P133 Linux 2.0.32 15.48 326.75 2.99 20.69 35.81 1.68
|
|
SCSI 32M
|
|
|
|
3 leslie, -o -F
|
|
no forced writes 15.90 24.98 2.63 20.46 36.43 1.69
|
|
|
|
4 leslie, -o -F
|
|
no ASSERTS 14.92 23.23 1.38 18.67 33.79 1.58
|
|
|
|
5 leslie, -o -F -B2048
|
|
more buffers 21.31 42.28 2.65 25.74 42.26 1.72
|
|
|
|
6 leslie, -o -F -B2048
|
|
more bufs, no ASSERT 20.52 39.79 1.40 24.77 39.51 1.55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Case to Case Difference Factors (+ is faster)
|
|
|
|
Single txn 8K txn Create 8K idx 8K random Simple
|
|
Case Description 8K insert 8K insert Index Insert Scans Orderby
|
|
=================== ========== ========= ====== ====== ========= =======
|
|
|
|
leslie vs BSD P90. 2.56 3.65 1.23 2.25 1.83 1.35
|
|
|
|
(noflush -F) vs no -F -1.03 13.08 1.14 1.01 -1.02 1.00
|
|
|
|
No Assert vs Assert 1.05 1.07 1.90 1.06 1.07 1.09
|
|
|
|
-B256 vs -B2048 1.34 1.69 1.01 1.26 1.16 1.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
Observations:
|
|
|
|
- leslie (P133 linux) appears to be about 1.8 times faster than the
|
|
P90 BSD system used for the test result distributed with the source, not
|
|
counting the 8K txn insert case which was completely disk bound.
|
|
|
|
- SCSI disks make a big (factor of 3.6) difference. During this test the
|
|
disk was hammering and cpu utilization was < 10%.
|
|
|
|
- Assertion checking seems to cost about 7% except for create index where
|
|
it costs 90%
|
|
|
|
- the -F option to avoid flushing buffers has tremendous effect if there are
|
|
many very small transactions. Or, another way, flushing at the end of the
|
|
transaction is a major disaster for performance.
|
|
|
|
- Something is very wrong with our buffer cache implementation. Going from
|
|
256 buffers to 2048 buffers costs an average of 25%. In the 8K txn case
|
|
it costs about 70%. I see looking at the code and profiling that in the 8K
|
|
txn case this is in BufferSync() which examines all the buffers at commit
|
|
time. I don't quite understand why it is so costly for the single 8K row
|
|
txn (35%) though.
|
|
|
|
It would be nice to have some more tests. Maybe the Wisconsin stuff will
|
|
be useful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
----------------- patch to test harness. apply from pgsql ------------
|
|
*** src/test/performance/runtests.pl.orig Sun Jun 14 11:34:04 1998
|
|
|
|
Differences %
|
|
|
|
|
|
----------------- patch to test harness. apply from pgsql ------------
|
|
*** src/test/performance/runtests.pl.orig Sun Jun 14 11:34:04 1998
|
|
--- src/test/performance/runtests.pl Sun Jun 14 12:07:30 1998
|
|
***************
|
|
*** 84,123 ****
|
|
open (STDERR, ">$TmpFile") or die;
|
|
select (STDERR); $| = 1;
|
|
|
|
! for ($i = 0; $i <= $#perftests; $i++)
|
|
! {
|
|
$test = $perftests[$i];
|
|
($test, $XACTBLOCK) = split (/ /, $test);
|
|
$runtest = $test;
|
|
! if ( $test =~ /\.ntm/ )
|
|
! {
|
|
! #
|
|
# No timing for this queries
|
|
- #
|
|
close (STDERR); # close $TmpFile
|
|
open (STDERR, ">/dev/null") or die;
|
|
$runtest =~ s/\.ntm//;
|
|
}
|
|
! else
|
|
! {
|
|
close (STDOUT);
|
|
open(STDOUT, ">&SAVEOUT");
|
|
print STDOUT "\nRunning: $perftests[$i+1] ...";
|
|
close (STDOUT);
|
|
open (STDOUT, ">/dev/null") or die;
|
|
select (STDERR); $| = 1;
|
|
! printf "$perftests[$i+1]: ";
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
do "sqls/$runtest";
|
|
|
|
# Restore STDERR to $TmpFile
|
|
! if ( $test =~ /\.ntm/ )
|
|
! {
|
|
close (STDERR);
|
|
open (STDERR, ">>$TmpFile") or die;
|
|
}
|
|
-
|
|
select (STDERR); $| = 1;
|
|
$i++;
|
|
}
|
|
--- 84,116 ----
|
|
open (STDERR, ">$TmpFile") or die;
|
|
select (STDERR); $| = 1;
|
|
|
|
! for ($i = 0; $i <= $#perftests; $i++) {
|
|
$test = $perftests[$i];
|
|
($test, $XACTBLOCK) = split (/ /, $test);
|
|
$runtest = $test;
|
|
! if ( $test =~ /\.ntm/ ) {
|
|
# No timing for this queries
|
|
close (STDERR); # close $TmpFile
|
|
open (STDERR, ">/dev/null") or die;
|
|
$runtest =~ s/\.ntm//;
|
|
}
|
|
! else {
|
|
close (STDOUT);
|
|
open(STDOUT, ">&SAVEOUT");
|
|
print STDOUT "\nRunning: $perftests[$i+1] ...";
|
|
close (STDOUT);
|
|
open (STDOUT, ">/dev/null") or die;
|
|
select (STDERR); $| = 1;
|
|
! print "$perftests[$i+1]: ";
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
do "sqls/$runtest";
|
|
|
|
# Restore STDERR to $TmpFile
|
|
! if ( $test =~ /\.ntm/ ) {
|
|
close (STDERR);
|
|
open (STDERR, ">>$TmpFile") or die;
|
|
}
|
|
select (STDERR); $| = 1;
|
|
$i++;
|
|
}
|
|
***************
|
|
*** 128,138 ****
|
|
open (TMPF, "<$TmpFile") or die;
|
|
open (RESF, ">$ResFile") or die;
|
|
|
|
! while (<TMPF>)
|
|
! {
|
|
! $str = $_;
|
|
! ($test, $rtime) = split (/:/, $str);
|
|
! ($tmp, $rtime, $rest) = split (/[ ]+/, $rtime);
|
|
! print RESF "$test: $rtime\n";
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
--- 121,130 ----
|
|
open (TMPF, "<$TmpFile") or die;
|
|
open (RESF, ">$ResFile") or die;
|
|
|
|
! while (<TMPF>) {
|
|
! if (m/^(.*: ).* ([0-9:.]+) *elapsed/) {
|
|
! ($test, $rtime) = ($1, $2);
|
|
! print RESF $test, $rtime, "\n";
|
|
! }
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------- testcase detail --------------------------
|
|
|
|
1. from distribution
|
|
DBMS: PostgreSQL 6.2b10
|
|
OS: FreeBSD 2.1.5-RELEASE
|
|
HardWare: i586/90, 24M RAM, IDE
|
|
StartUp: postmaster -B 256 '-o -S 2048' -S
|
|
Compiler: gcc 2.6.3
|
|
Compiled: -O, without CASSERT checking, with
|
|
-DTBL_FREE_CMD_MEMORY (to free memory
|
|
if BEGIN/END after each query execution)
|
|
DB connection startup: 0.20
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (1 xact): 39.58
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (8192 xacts): 1190.98
|
|
Create INDEX on SIMPLE: 3.69
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE with INDEX (1 xact): 46.65
|
|
8192 random INDEX scans on SIMPLE (1 xact): 65.49
|
|
ORDER BY SIMPLE: 2.27
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. run on leslie with asserts
|
|
DBMS: PostgreSQL 6.3.2 (plus changes to 98/06/01)
|
|
OS: Linux 2.0.32 leslie
|
|
HardWare: i586/133 HX 512, 32M RAM, fast SCSI, 7200rpm
|
|
StartUp: postmaster -B 256 '-o -S 2048' -S
|
|
Compiler: gcc 2.7.2.3
|
|
Compiled: -O, WITH CASSERT checking, with
|
|
-DTBL_FREE_CMD_MEMORY (to free memory
|
|
if BEGIN/END after each query execution)
|
|
DB connection startup: 0.10
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (1 xact): 15.48
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (8192 xacts): 326.75
|
|
Create INDEX on SIMPLE: 2.99
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE with INDEX (1 xact): 20.69
|
|
8192 random INDEX scans on SIMPLE (1 xact): 35.81
|
|
ORDER BY SIMPLE: 1.68
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. with -F to avoid forced i/o
|
|
DBMS: PostgreSQL 6.3.2 (plus changes to 98/06/01)
|
|
OS: Linux 2.0.32 leslie
|
|
HardWare: i586/133 HX 512, 32M RAM, fast SCSI, 7200rpm
|
|
StartUp: postmaster -B 256 '-o -S 2048 -F' -S
|
|
Compiler: gcc 2.7.2.3
|
|
Compiled: -O, WITH CASSERT checking, with
|
|
-DTBL_FREE_CMD_MEMORY (to free memory
|
|
if BEGIN/END after each query execution)
|
|
DB connection startup: 0.10
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (1 xact): 15.90
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (8192 xacts): 24.98
|
|
Create INDEX on SIMPLE: 2.63
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE with INDEX (1 xact): 20.46
|
|
8192 random INDEX scans on SIMPLE (1 xact): 36.43
|
|
ORDER BY SIMPLE: 1.69
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. no asserts, -F to avoid forced I/O
|
|
DBMS: PostgreSQL 6.3.2 (plus changes to 98/06/01)
|
|
OS: Linux 2.0.32 leslie
|
|
HardWare: i586/133 HX 512, 32M RAM, fast SCSI, 7200rpm
|
|
StartUp: postmaster -B 256 '-o -S 2048' -S
|
|
Compiler: gcc 2.7.2.3
|
|
Compiled: -O, No CASSERT checking, with
|
|
-DTBL_FREE_CMD_MEMORY (to free memory
|
|
if BEGIN/END after each query execution)
|
|
DB connection startup: 0.10
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (1 xact): 14.92
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (8192 xacts): 23.23
|
|
Create INDEX on SIMPLE: 1.38
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE with INDEX (1 xact): 18.67
|
|
8192 random INDEX scans on SIMPLE (1 xact): 33.79
|
|
ORDER BY SIMPLE: 1.58
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. with more buffers (2048 vs 256) and -F to avoid forced i/o
|
|
DBMS: PostgreSQL 6.3.2 (plus changes to 98/06/01)
|
|
OS: Linux 2.0.32 leslie
|
|
HardWare: i586/133 HX 512, 32M RAM, fast SCSI, 7200rpm
|
|
StartUp: postmaster -B 2048 '-o -S 2048 -F' -S
|
|
Compiler: gcc 2.7.2.3
|
|
Compiled: -O, WITH CASSERT checking, with
|
|
-DTBL_FREE_CMD_MEMORY (to free memory
|
|
if BEGIN/END after each query execution)
|
|
DB connection startup: 0.11
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (1 xact): 21.31
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (8192 xacts): 42.28
|
|
Create INDEX on SIMPLE: 2.65
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE with INDEX (1 xact): 25.74
|
|
8192 random INDEX scans on SIMPLE (1 xact): 42.26
|
|
ORDER BY SIMPLE: 1.72
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. No Asserts, more buffers (2048 vs 256) and -F to avoid forced i/o
|
|
DBMS: PostgreSQL 6.3.2 (plus changes to 98/06/01)
|
|
OS: Linux 2.0.32 leslie
|
|
HardWare: i586/133 HX 512, 32M RAM, fast SCSI, 7200rpm
|
|
StartUp: postmaster -B 2048 '-o -S 2048 -F' -S
|
|
Compiler: gcc 2.7.2.3
|
|
Compiled: -O, No CASSERT checking, with
|
|
-DTBL_FREE_CMD_MEMORY (to free memory
|
|
if BEGIN/END after each query execution)
|
|
DB connection startup: 0.11
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (1 xact): 20.52
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE (8192 xacts): 39.79
|
|
Create INDEX on SIMPLE: 1.40
|
|
8192 INSERTs INTO SIMPLE with INDEX (1 xact): 24.77
|
|
8192 random INDEX scans on SIMPLE (1 xact): 39.51
|
|
ORDER BY SIMPLE: 1.55
|
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
-dg
|
|
|
|
David Gould dg@illustra.com 510.628.3783 or 510.305.9468
|
|
Informix Software (No, really) 300 Lakeside Drive Oakland, CA 94612
|
|
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any
|
|
good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." -- Howard Aiken
|
|
|
|
|
|
From owner-pgsql-hackers@hub.org Tue Oct 19 10:31:10 1999
|
|
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
|
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA29087
|
|
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:31:08 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [216.126.84.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.8 $) with ESMTP id KAA27535 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:19:47 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from localhost (majordom@localhost)
|
|
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA30328;
|
|
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:12:10 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-hackers)
|
|
Received: by hub.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:11:55 -0400
|
|
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
|
|
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA30030
|
|
for pgsql-hackers-outgoing; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:11:00 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org)
|
|
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.166.2])
|
|
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA29914
|
|
for <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:10:33 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
|
|
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
|
|
by sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA09038;
|
|
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:09:15 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
To: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>
|
|
cc: "Vadim Mikheev" <vadim@krs.ru>, pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
|
|
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] mdnblocks is an amazing time sink in huge relations
|
|
In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 19 Oct 1999 19:03:22 +0900
|
|
<000801bf1a19$2d88ae20$2801007e@cadzone.tpf.co.jp>
|
|
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:09:15 -0400
|
|
Message-ID: <9036.940342155@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
|
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
|
Sender: owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
|
|
"Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
|
|
> 1. shared cache holds committed system tuples.
|
|
> 2. private cache holds uncommitted system tuples.
|
|
> 3. relpages of shared cache are updated immediately by
|
|
> phisical change and corresponding buffer pages are
|
|
> marked dirty.
|
|
> 4. on commit, the contents of uncommitted tuples except
|
|
> relpages,reltuples,... are copied to correponding tuples
|
|
> in shared cache and the combined contents are
|
|
> committed.
|
|
> If so,catalog cache invalidation would be no longer needed.
|
|
> But synchronization of the step 4. may be difficult.
|
|
|
|
I think the main problem is that relpages and reltuples shouldn't
|
|
be kept in pg_class columns at all, because they need to have
|
|
very different update behavior from the other pg_class columns.
|
|
|
|
The rest of pg_class is update-on-commit, and we can lock down any one
|
|
row in the normal MVCC way (if transaction A has modified a row and
|
|
transaction B also wants to modify it, B waits for A to commit or abort,
|
|
so it can know which version of the row to start from). Furthermore,
|
|
there can legitimately be several different values of a row in use in
|
|
different places: the latest committed, an uncommitted modification, and
|
|
one or more old values that are still being used by active transactions
|
|
because they were current when those transactions started. (BTW, the
|
|
present relcache is pretty bad about maintaining pure MVCC transaction
|
|
semantics like this, but it seems clear to me that that's the direction
|
|
we want to go in.)
|
|
|
|
relpages cannot operate this way. To be useful for avoiding lseeks,
|
|
relpages *must* change exactly when the physical file changes. It
|
|
matters not at all whether the particular transaction that extended the
|
|
file ultimately commits or not. Moreover there can be only one correct
|
|
value (per relation) across the whole system, because there is only one
|
|
length of the relation file.
|
|
|
|
If we want to take reltuples seriously and try to maintain it
|
|
on-the-fly, then I think it needs still a third behavior. Clearly
|
|
it cannot be updated using MVCC rules, or we lose all writer
|
|
concurrency (if A has added tuples to a rel, B would have to wait
|
|
for A to commit before it could update reltuples...). Furthermore
|
|
"updating" isn't a simple matter of storing what you think the new
|
|
value is; otherwise two transactions adding tuples in parallel would
|
|
leave the wrong answer after B commits and overwrites A's value.
|
|
I think it would work for each transaction to keep track of a net delta
|
|
in reltuples for each table it's changed (total tuples added less total
|
|
tuples deleted), and then atomically add that value to the table's
|
|
shared reltuples counter during commit. But that still leaves the
|
|
problem of how you use the counter during a transaction to get an
|
|
accurate answer to the question "If I scan this table now, how many tuples
|
|
will I see?" At the time the question is asked, the current shared
|
|
counter value might include the effects of transactions that have
|
|
committed since your transaction started, and therefore are not visible
|
|
under MVCC rules. I think getting the correct answer would involve
|
|
making an instantaneous copy of the current counter at the start of
|
|
your xact, and then adding your own private net-uncommitted-delta to
|
|
the saved shared counter value when asked the question. This doesn't
|
|
look real practical --- you'd have to save the reltuples counts of
|
|
*all* tables in the database at the start of each xact, on the off
|
|
chance that you might need them. Ugh. Perhaps someone has a better
|
|
idea. In any case, reltuples clearly needs different mechanisms than
|
|
the ordinary fields in pg_class do, because updating it will be a
|
|
performance bottleneck otherwise.
|
|
|
|
If we allow reltuples to be updated only by vacuum-like events, as
|
|
it is now, then I think keeping it in pg_class is still OK.
|
|
|
|
In short, it seems clear to me that relpages should be removed from
|
|
pg_class and kept somewhere else if we want to make it more reliable
|
|
than it is now, and the same for reltuples (but reltuples doesn't
|
|
behave the same as relpages, and probably ought to be handled
|
|
differently).
|
|
|
|
regards, tom lane
|
|
|
|
************
|
|
|
|
From owner-pgsql-hackers@hub.org Tue Oct 19 21:25:30 1999
|
|
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
|
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id VAA28130
|
|
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:25:26 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [216.126.84.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.8 $) with ESMTP id VAA10512 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:15:28 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from localhost (majordom@localhost)
|
|
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA50745;
|
|
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:07:23 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-hackers)
|
|
Received: by hub.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:07:01 -0400
|
|
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
|
|
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA50644
|
|
for pgsql-hackers-outgoing; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:06:06 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org)
|
|
Received: from sd.tpf.co.jp (sd.tpf.co.jp [210.161.239.34])
|
|
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA50584
|
|
for <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:05:26 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
(envelope-from Inoue@tpf.co.jp)
|
|
Received: from cadzone ([126.0.1.40] (may be forged))
|
|
by sd.tpf.co.jp (2.5 Build 2640 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with SMTP
|
|
id KAA01715; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 10:05:14 +0900
|
|
From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>
|
|
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
|
Cc: <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
|
|
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] mdnblocks is an amazing time sink in huge relations
|
|
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 10:09:13 +0900
|
|
Message-ID: <000501bf1a97$b925a860$2801007e@cadzone.tpf.co.jp>
|
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain;
|
|
charset="iso-8859-1"
|
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
|
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
|
|
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
|
|
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
|
|
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
|
|
Importance: Normal
|
|
Sender: owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
|
|
> -----Original Message-----
|
|
> From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp]
|
|
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 1999 6:45 PM
|
|
> To: Tom Lane
|
|
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
|
|
> Subject: RE: [HACKERS] mdnblocks is an amazing time sink in huge
|
|
> relations
|
|
>
|
|
>
|
|
> >
|
|
> > "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
|
|
>
|
|
> [snip]
|
|
>
|
|
> >
|
|
> > > Deletion is necessary only not to consume disk space.
|
|
> > >
|
|
> > > For example vacuum could remove not deleted files.
|
|
> >
|
|
> > Hmm ... interesting idea ... but I can hear the complaints
|
|
> > from users already...
|
|
> >
|
|
>
|
|
> My idea is only an analogy of PostgreSQL's simple recovery
|
|
> mechanism of tuples.
|
|
>
|
|
> And my main point is
|
|
> "delete fails after commit" doesn't harm the database
|
|
> except that not deleted files consume disk space.
|
|
>
|
|
> Of cource,it's preferable to delete relation files immediately
|
|
> after(or just when) commit.
|
|
> Useless files are visible though useless tuples are invisible.
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
Anyway I don't need "DROP TABLE inside transactions" now
|
|
and my idea is originally for that issue.
|
|
|
|
After a thought,I propose the following solution.
|
|
|
|
1. mdcreate() couldn't create existent relation files.
|
|
If the existent file is of length zero,we would overwrite
|
|
the file.(seems the comment in md.c says so but the
|
|
code doesn't do so).
|
|
If the file is an Index relation file,we would overwrite
|
|
the file.
|
|
|
|
2. mdunlink() couldn't unlink non-existent relation files.
|
|
mdunlink() doesn't call elog(ERROR) even if the file
|
|
doesn't exist,though I couldn't find where to change
|
|
now.
|
|
mdopen() doesn't call elog(ERROR) even if the file
|
|
doesn't exist and leaves the relation as CLOSED.
|
|
|
|
Comments ?
|
|
|
|
Regards.
|
|
|
|
Hiroshi Inoue
|
|
Inoue@tpf.co.jp
|
|
|
|
************
|
|
|
|
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M6267@hub.org Sun Aug 27 21:46:37 2000
|
|
Received: from hub.org (root@hub.org [216.126.84.1])
|
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id UAA07972
|
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 27 Aug 2000 20:46:36 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from hub.org (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
|
|
by hub.org (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id e7S0kaL27996;
|
|
Sun, 27 Aug 2000 20:46:36 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.166.2])
|
|
by hub.org (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e7S05aL24107
|
|
for <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>; Sun, 27 Aug 2000 20:05:36 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
|
|
by sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA01604
|
|
for <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>; Sun, 27 Aug 2000 20:05:29 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
To: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
|
|
Subject: [HACKERS] Possible performance improvement: buffer replacement policy
|
|
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 20:05:29 -0400
|
|
Message-ID: <1601.967421129@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
|
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
|
X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
|
Precedence: bulk
|
|
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
|
|
Those of you with long memories may recall a benchmark that Edmund Mergl
|
|
drew our attention to back in May '99. That test showed extremely slow
|
|
performance for updating a table with many indexes (about 20). At the
|
|
time, it seemed the problem was due to bad performance of btree with
|
|
many equal keys, so I thought I'd go back and retry the benchmark after
|
|
this latest round of btree hackery.
|
|
|
|
The good news is that btree itself seems to be pretty well fixed; the
|
|
bad news is that the benchmark is still slow for large numbers of rows.
|
|
The problem is I/O: the CPU mostly sits idle waiting for the disk.
|
|
As best I can tell, the difficulty is that the working set of pages
|
|
needed to update this many indexes is too large compared to the number
|
|
of disk buffers Postgres is using. (I was running with -B 1000 and
|
|
looking at behavior for a 100000-row test table. This gave me a table
|
|
size of 3876 pages, plus 11526 pages in 20 indexes.)
|
|
|
|
Of course, there's only so much we can do when the number of buffers
|
|
is too small, but I still started to wonder if we are using the buffers
|
|
as effectively as we can. Some tracing showed that most of the pages
|
|
of the indexes were being read and written multiple times within a
|
|
single UPDATE query, while most of the pages of the table proper were
|
|
fetched and written only once. That says we're not using the buffers
|
|
as well as we could; the index pages are not being kept in memory when
|
|
they should be. In a query like this, we should displace main-table
|
|
pages sooner to allow keeping more index pages in cache --- but with
|
|
the simple LRU replacement method we use, once a page has been loaded
|
|
it will stay in cache for at least the next NBuffers (-B) page
|
|
references, no matter what. With a large NBuffers that's a long time.
|
|
|
|
I've come across an interesting article:
|
|
The LRU-K Page Replacement Algorithm For Database Disk Buffering
|
|
Elizabeth J. O'Neil, Patrick E. O'Neil, Gerhard Weikum
|
|
Proceedings of the 1993 ACM SIGMOD international conference
|
|
on Management of Data, May 1993
|
|
(If you subscribe to the ACM digital library, you can get a PDF of this
|
|
from there.) This article argues that standard LRU buffer management is
|
|
inherently not great for database caches, and that it's much better to
|
|
replace pages on the basis of time since the K'th most recent reference,
|
|
not just time since the most recent one. K=2 is enough to get most of
|
|
the benefit. The big win is that you are measuring an actual page
|
|
interreference time (between the last two references) and not just
|
|
dealing with a lower-bound guess on the interreference time. Frequently
|
|
used pages are thus much more likely to stay in cache.
|
|
|
|
It looks like it wouldn't take too much work to replace shared buffers
|
|
on the basis of LRU-2 instead of LRU, so I'm thinking about trying it.
|
|
|
|
Has anyone looked into this area? Is there a better method to try?
|
|
|
|
regards, tom lane
|
|
|
|
From prlw1@newn.cam.ac.uk Fri Jan 19 12:54:45 2001
|
|
Received: from henry.newn.cam.ac.uk (henry.newn.cam.ac.uk [131.111.204.130])
|
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id MAA29822
|
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:54:44 -0500 (EST)
|
|
Received: from [131.111.204.180] (helo=quartz.newn.cam.ac.uk)
|
|
by henry.newn.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1)
|
|
id 14JfkU-0001WA-00; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 17:54:54 +0000
|
|
Received: from prlw1 by quartz.newn.cam.ac.uk with local (Exim 3.13 #1)
|
|
id 14Jfj6-0001cq-00; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 17:53:28 +0000
|
|
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 17:53:28 +0000
|
|
From: Patrick Welche <prlw1@newn.cam.ac.uk>
|
|
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
|
|
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
|
|
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Possible performance improvement: buffer replacement policy
|
|
Message-ID: <20010119175328.A6223@quartz.newn.cam.ac.uk>
|
|
Reply-To: prlw1@cam.ac.uk
|
|
References: <1601.967421129@sss.pgh.pa.us> <200101191703.MAA25873@candle.pha.pa.us>
|
|
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
|
|
Content-Disposition: inline
|
|
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
|
|
In-Reply-To: <200101191703.MAA25873@candle.pha.pa.us>; from pgman@candle.pha.pa.us on Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 12:03:58PM -0500
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
|
|
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 12:03:58PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
|
|
>
|
|
> Tom, did we ever test this? I think we did and found that it was the
|
|
> same or worse, right?
|
|
|
|
(Funnily enough, I just read that message:)
|
|
|
|
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
|
|
cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
|
|
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Possible performance improvement: buffer replacement policy
|
|
In-reply-to: <200010161541.LAA06653@candle.pha.pa.us>
|
|
References: <200010161541.LAA06653@candle.pha.pa.us>
|
|
Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
|
|
message dated "Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:41:41 -0400"
|
|
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:49:52 -0400
|
|
Message-ID: <26100.971711392@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
|
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
|
X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
|
Precedence: bulk
|
|
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
Content-Length: 947
|
|
Lines: 19
|
|
|
|
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
|
|
>> It looks like it wouldn't take too much work to replace shared buffers
|
|
>> on the basis of LRU-2 instead of LRU, so I'm thinking about trying it.
|
|
>>
|
|
>> Has anyone looked into this area? Is there a better method to try?
|
|
|
|
> Sounds like a perfect idea. Good luck. :-)
|
|
|
|
Actually, the idea went down in flames :-(, but I neglected to report
|
|
back to pghackers about it. I did do some code to manage buffers as
|
|
LRU-2. I didn't have any good performance test cases to try it with,
|
|
but Richard Brosnahan was kind enough to re-run the TPC tests previously
|
|
published by Great Bridge with that code in place. Wasn't any faster,
|
|
in fact possibly a little slower, likely due to the extra CPU time spent
|
|
on buffer freelist management. It's possible that other scenarios might
|
|
show a better result, but right now I feel pretty discouraged about the
|
|
LRU-2 idea and am not pursuing it.
|
|
|
|
regards, tom lane
|
|
|
|
|
|
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M3455@postgresql.org Fri Jan 19 13:18:12 2001
|
|
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id NAA02092
|
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 13:18:12 -0500 (EST)
|
|
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
|
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f0JIFJ037872;
|
|
Fri, 19 Jan 2001 13:15:19 -0500 (EST)
|
|
(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M3455@postgresql.org)
|
|
Received: from sectorbase2.sectorbase.com ([208.48.122.131])
|
|
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0JI7V036780
|
|
for <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 13:07:31 -0500 (EST)
|
|
(envelope-from vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM)
|
|
Received: by sectorbase2.sectorbase.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
|
|
id <DG1W4LRZ>; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 09:46:14 -0800
|
|
Message-ID: <8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A234D329F@sectorbase1.sectorbase.com>
|
|
From: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>
|
|
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
|
|
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
|
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Possible performance improvement: buffer replacemen
|
|
t policy
|
|
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 10:07:27 -0800
|
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
|
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain;
|
|
charset="iso-8859-1"
|
|
Precedence: bulk
|
|
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
|
|
> > Tom, did we ever test this? I think we did and found that
|
|
> > it was the same or worse, right?
|
|
>
|
|
> I tried it and didn't see any noticeable improvement on the particular
|
|
> test case I was using, so I got discouraged and didn't pursue the idea
|
|
> further. I'd like to come back to it someday, though.
|
|
|
|
I don't know how much useful could be LRU-2 but with WAL we should try
|
|
to reuse undirty free buffers first, not dirty ones, just to postpone
|
|
writes as long as we can. (BTW, this is what Oracle does.)
|
|
So, we probably should put new unfree dirty buffer just before first
|
|
dirty one in LRU.
|
|
|
|
Vadim
|
|
|
|
From markw@mohawksoft.com Thu Jun 7 14:40:02 2001
|
|
Return-path: <markw@mohawksoft.com>
|
|
Received: from gromit.dotclick.com (ipn9-f8366.net-resource.net [216.204.83.66])
|
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f57Ie1c14004
|
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Thu, 7 Jun 2001 14:40:02 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from mohawksoft.com (IDENT:markw@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
|
|
by gromit.dotclick.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA04973;
|
|
Thu, 7 Jun 2001 14:37:00 -0400
|
|
Sender: markw@gromit.dotclick.com
|
|
Message-ID: <3B1FC9CB.57C72AD6@mohawksoft.com>
|
|
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 14:36:59 -0400
|
|
From: mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>
|
|
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2 i686)
|
|
X-Accept-Language: en
|
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
|
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>,
|
|
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
|
|
Subject: Re: 7.2 items
|
|
References: <200106071503.f57F32n03924@candle.pha.pa.us>
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
|
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
|
|
Bruce Momjian wrote:
|
|
|
|
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
|
|
> >
|
|
> > > Here is a small list of big TODO items. I was wondering which ones
|
|
> > > people were thinking about for 7.2?
|
|
> >
|
|
> > A friend of mine wants to use PostgreSQL instead of Oracle for a large
|
|
> > application, but has run into a snag when speed comparisons looked
|
|
> > good until the Oracle folks added a couple of BITMAP indexes. I can't
|
|
> > recall seeing any discussion about that here -- are there any plans?
|
|
>
|
|
> It is not on our list and I am not sure what they do.
|
|
|
|
Do you have access to any Oracle Documentation? There is a good explanation
|
|
of them.
|
|
|
|
However, I will try to explain.
|
|
|
|
If you have a table, locations. It has 1,000,000 records.
|
|
|
|
In oracle you do this:
|
|
|
|
create bitmap index bitmap_foo on locations (state) ;
|
|
|
|
For each unique value of 'state' oracle will create a bitmap with 1,000,000
|
|
bits in it. With a one representing a match and a zero representing no
|
|
match. Record '0' in the table is represented by bit '0' in the bitmap,
|
|
record '1' is represented by bit '1', record two by bit '2' and so on.
|
|
|
|
In a table where comparatively few different values are to be indexed in a
|
|
large table, a bitmap index can be quite small and not suffer the N * log(N)
|
|
disk I/O most tree based indexes suffer. If the bitmap is fairly sparse or
|
|
dense (or have periods of denseness and sparseness), it can be compressed
|
|
very efficiently as well.
|
|
|
|
When the statement:
|
|
|
|
select * from locations where state = 'MA';
|
|
|
|
Is executed, the bitmap is read into memory in very few disk operations.
|
|
(Perhaps even as few as one or two). It is a simple operation of rifling
|
|
through the bitmap for '1's that indicate the record has the property,
|
|
'state' = 'MA';
|
|
|
|
|
|
From mascarm@mascari.com Thu Jun 7 15:36:25 2001
|
|
Return-path: <mascarm@mascari.com>
|
|
Received: from corvette.mascari.com (dhcp065-024-161-045.columbus.rr.com [65.24.161.45])
|
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f57JaOc21943
|
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:36:24 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from ferrari (ferrari.mascari.com [192.168.2.1])
|
|
by corvette.mascari.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA25607;
|
|
Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:29:31 -0400
|
|
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:34:18 -0400
|
|
Message-ID: <01C0EF67.5105D2E0.mascarm@mascari.com>
|
|
From: Mike Mascari <mascarm@mascari.com>
|
|
Reply-To: "mascarm@mascari.com" <mascarm@mascari.com>
|
|
To: "'mlw'" <markw@mohawksoft.com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>,
|
|
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
|
|
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: 7.2 items
|
|
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:34:17 -0400
|
|
Organization: Mascari Development Inc.
|
|
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
|
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
|
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
|
|
And in addition,
|
|
|
|
If you submitted the query:
|
|
|
|
SELECT * FROM addresses WHERE state = 'OH'
|
|
AND areacode = '614'
|
|
|
|
Then, with bitmap indexes, the bitmaps are just logically ANDed
|
|
together, and the final bitmap determines the matching rows.
|
|
|
|
Mike Mascari
|
|
mascarm@mascari.com
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message-----
|
|
From: mlw [SMTP:markw@mohawksoft.com]
|
|
|
|
Bruce Momjian wrote:
|
|
|
|
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
|
|
> >
|
|
> > > Here is a small list of big TODO items. I was wondering which
|
|
ones
|
|
> > > people were thinking about for 7.2?
|
|
> >
|
|
> > A friend of mine wants to use PostgreSQL instead of Oracle for a
|
|
large
|
|
> > application, but has run into a snag when speed comparisons
|
|
looked
|
|
> > good until the Oracle folks added a couple of BITMAP indexes. I
|
|
can't
|
|
> > recall seeing any discussion about that here -- are there any
|
|
plans?
|
|
>
|
|
> It is not on our list and I am not sure what they do.
|
|
|
|
Do you have access to any Oracle Documentation? There is a good
|
|
explanation
|
|
of them.
|
|
|
|
However, I will try to explain.
|
|
|
|
If you have a table, locations. It has 1,000,000 records.
|
|
|
|
In oracle you do this:
|
|
|
|
create bitmap index bitmap_foo on locations (state) ;
|
|
|
|
For each unique value of 'state' oracle will create a bitmap with
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
bits in it. With a one representing a match and a zero representing
|
|
no
|
|
match. Record '0' in the table is represented by bit '0' in the
|
|
bitmap,
|
|
record '1' is represented by bit '1', record two by bit '2' and so
|
|
on.
|
|
|
|
In a table where comparatively few different values are to be indexed
|
|
in a
|
|
large table, a bitmap index can be quite small and not suffer the N *
|
|
log(N)
|
|
disk I/O most tree based indexes suffer. If the bitmap is fairly
|
|
sparse or
|
|
dense (or have periods of denseness and sparseness), it can be
|
|
compressed
|
|
very efficiently as well.
|
|
|
|
When the statement:
|
|
|
|
select * from locations where state = 'MA';
|
|
|
|
Is executed, the bitmap is read into memory in very few disk
|
|
operations.
|
|
(Perhaps even as few as one or two). It is a simple operation of
|
|
rifling
|
|
through the bitmap for '1's that indicate the record has the
|
|
property,
|
|
'state' = 'MA';
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From oleg@sai.msu.su Thu Jun 7 15:39:15 2001
|
|
Return-path: <oleg@sai.msu.su>
|
|
Received: from ra.sai.msu.su (ra.sai.msu.su [158.250.29.2])
|
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f57Jd7c22010
|
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:39:08 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from ra (ra [158.250.29.2])
|
|
by ra.sai.msu.su (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA07783;
|
|
Thu, 7 Jun 2001 22:38:20 +0300 (GMT)
|
|
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 22:38:20 +0300 (GMT)
|
|
From: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
|
|
X-X-Sender: <megera@ra.sai.msu.su>
|
|
To: mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>
|
|
cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>,
|
|
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
|
|
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: 7.2 items
|
|
In-Reply-To: <3B1FC9CB.57C72AD6@mohawksoft.com>
|
|
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0106072234120.6015-100000@ra.sai.msu.su>
|
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
|
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
|
|
Status: RO
|
|
|
|
I think it's possible to implement bitmap indexes with a little
|
|
effort using GiST. at least I know one implementation
|
|
http://www.it.iitb.ernet.in/~rvijay/dbms/proj/
|
|
if you have interests you could implement bitmap indexes yourself
|
|
unfortunately, we're very busy
|
|
|
|
Oleg
|
|
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, mlw wrote:
|
|
|
|
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
|
|
>
|
|
> > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
|
|
> > >
|
|
> > > > Here is a small list of big TODO items. I was wondering which ones
|
|
> > > > people were thinking about for 7.2?
|
|
> > >
|
|
> > > A friend of mine wants to use PostgreSQL instead of Oracle for a large
|
|
> > > application, but has run into a snag when speed comparisons looked
|
|
> > > good until the Oracle folks added a couple of BITMAP indexes. I can't
|
|
> > > recall seeing any discussion about that here -- are there any plans?
|
|
> >
|
|
> > It is not on our list and I am not sure what they do.
|
|
>
|
|
> Do you have access to any Oracle Documentation? There is a good explanation
|
|
> of them.
|
|
>
|
|
> However, I will try to explain.
|
|
>
|
|
> If you have a table, locations. It has 1,000,000 records.
|
|
>
|
|
> In oracle you do this:
|
|
>
|
|
> create bitmap index bitmap_foo on locations (state) ;
|
|
>
|
|
> For each unique value of 'state' oracle will create a bitmap with 1,000,000
|
|
> bits in it. With a one representing a match and a zero representing no
|
|
> match. Record '0' in the table is represented by bit '0' in the bitmap,
|
|
> record '1' is represented by bit '1', record two by bit '2' and so on.
|
|
>
|
|
> In a table where comparatively few different values are to be indexed in a
|
|
> large table, a bitmap index can be quite small and not suffer the N * log(N)
|
|
> disk I/O most tree based indexes suffer. If the bitmap is fairly sparse or
|
|
> dense (or have periods of denseness and sparseness), it can be compressed
|
|
> very efficiently as well.
|
|
>
|
|
> When the statement:
|
|
>
|
|
> select * from locations where state = 'MA';
|
|
>
|
|
> Is executed, the bitmap is read into memory in very few disk operations.
|
|
> (Perhaps even as few as one or two). It is a simple operation of rifling
|
|
> through the bitmap for '1's that indicate the record has the property,
|
|
> 'state' = 'MA';
|
|
>
|
|
>
|
|
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
|
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
|
|
>
|
|
> http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
Regards,
|
|
Oleg
|
|
_____________________________________________________________
|
|
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
|
|
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
|
|
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
|
|
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
|
|
|
|
|