Re: [HACKERS] sorting big tables :(
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
From: Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: miker@scifair.acadiau.ca (Michael Richards)
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Date: 1998-05-16T00:00:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > I think soon people are going to start calling me Mr. Big...Tables... > > I have a big table. 40M rows. > On the disk, it's size is: > 2,090,369,024 bytes. So 2 gigs. On a 9 gig drive I can't sort this table. > How should one decide based on table size how much room is needed? > > Also, this simple table consisting of only 2 int4 values is the exact size > of an equally sized table consisting of only one int2. There seems to be > too much overhead here. I realise there are extra things that have to be > saved, but I am not getting the size/performance I had hoped for... I am > starting to think this segment of the database would be better implemented > without a dbms because it is not expected to change at all... > It is taking so much disk space because it is using a TAPE sorting method, by breaking the file into tape chunks and sorting in pieces, the merging. Can you try increasing your postgres -S parameter to some huge amount like 32MB and see if that helps? It should. i.e. postmaster -i -B 400 $DEBUG -o '-F -S 1024' "$@" >server.log 2>&1 -- Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026 + If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w) + Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)