From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 8 07:51:22 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27B0916A403 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 07:51:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from almarrie@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.175]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA1BE13C458 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 07:51:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from almarrie@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o2so5487345uge for ; Sun, 07 Jan 2007 23:51:18 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=sVQ2rzZk2TZAiEfRVh5iXRbZ3qLT2oukGr9VnjR82/aSSA0aoU4kSOa7kRzH++c+qoTB3i0tQiraia9mcJdrqD2IqazlNXjfzZkA4slkJBjvfZJrRHEyU0cxPvPoiPHqhnnf9x0FpkHfAfOQFk97GCcJWR4qNaiRSX65HUeJhII= Received: by 10.67.19.20 with SMTP id w20mr21299991ugi.1168242678863; Sun, 07 Jan 2007 23:51:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.255.10 with HTTP; Sun, 7 Jan 2007 23:51:18 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <499c70c0701072351k114119e5kc4d9864fcc651cd7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 10:51:18 +0300 From: "Abdullah Al-Marrie" To: "Ivan Voras" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200701071301.27423.kirk@strauser.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tuning PostgreSQL for bulk imports X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 07:51:22 -0000 Kirk Strauser wrote: > I have an hourly job that converts our legacy Foxpro database into > PostgreSQL tables so that our web applications, etc. can run reports off > the data in a reasonable amount of time. Believe it or not, this has been > running perfectly in production for over a year. The only problem I'd > still like to solve is that loading the data pegs the filesystem at 100% > for many minutes at a time. Why did you choose PostgreSQL over MySQL 5.0.x? Is the latest PostgreSQL release performance much better than MySQL 5.0.x in RELENG_6 with SMP and 2 GB of ram now? -- Regards, -Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri Arab Portal http://www.WeArab.Net/