On 2006-10-13, Alexander Staubo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On my box (Dell PowerEdge 1850, dual Xeon 2.8GHz, 4GB RAM, 10kRPM > SCSI, Linux 2.6.15, Ubuntu) I get 1,100 updates/sec, compared to > 10,000 updates/sec with MySQL/InnoDB, using a stock installation of > both. Insert performance is only around 10% worse than MySQL at > around 9,000 rows/sec. Curiously enough, changing shared_buffers, > wal_buffers, effective_cache_size and even fsync seems to have no > effect on update performance, while fsync has a decent effect on > insert performance.
Your disk probably has write caching enabled. A 10krpm disk should be limiting you to under 170 transactions/sec with a single connection and fsync enabled. I also did some tests on this, and even though the machine I was testing on had some competing database activity, autovacuum was effective at keeping the table size stable (at 70-odd pages) when running several hundred thousand updates on a 1-row table. -- Andrew, Supernews http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
