PostgreSQL, Foreign Keys, Insert speed & Django

Posted by Miles on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by Miles
Published on 2009-09-24T15:29:58Z Indexed on 2010/04/21 9:03 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 284

Filed under:
|
|
|
|

A few days ago, I ran into an unexpected performance problem with a pretty standard Django setup. For an upcoming feature, we have to regenerate a table hourly, containing about 100k rows of data, 9M on the disk, 10M indexes according to pgAdmin.

The problem is that inserting them by whatever method literally takes ages, up to 3 minutes of 100% disk busy time. That's not something you want on a production site. It doesn't matter if the inserts were in a transaction, issued via plain insert, multi-row insert, COPY FROM or even INSERT INTO t1 SELECT * FROM t2.

After noticing this isn't Django's fault, I followed a trial and error route, and hey, the problem disappeared after dropping all foreign keys! Instead of 3 minutes, the INSERT INTO SELECT FROM took less than a second to execute, which isn't too surprising for a table <= 20M on the disk. What is weird is that PostgreSQL manages to slow down inserts by 180x just by using 3 foreign keys.

Oh, disk activity was pure writing, as everything is cached in RAM; only writes go to the disks. It looks like PostgreSQL is working very hard to touch every row in the referred tables, as 3MB/sec * 180s is way more data than the 20MB this new table takes on disk. No WAL for the 180s case, I was testing in psql directly, in Django, add ~50% overhead for WAL logging. Tried @commit_on_success, same slowness, I had even implemented multi row insert and COPY FROM with psycopg2. That's another weird thing, how can 10M worth of inserts generate > 10x 16M log segments?

Table layout: id serial primary, a bunch of int32, 3 foreign keys to

  • small table, 198 rows, 16k on disk
  • large table, 1.2M rows, 59 data + 89 index MB on disk
  • large table, 2.2M rows, 198 + 210MB

So, am I doomed to either drop the foreign keys manually or use the table in a very un-Django way by defining saving bla_id x3 and skip using models.ForeignKey? I'd love to hear about some magical antidote / pg setting to fix this.

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about postgresql

Related posts about foreign-keys