[postgis-users] Poor Geocoder Performance

[Brandon Abear]

Here is a sample address. This one currently takes 30567ms to return.
7 EADS ST, CHICAGO, IL 60632

My desktop has 16GB of ram and an i7 processor.


On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:52 PM, Paragon Corporation <lr at pcorp.us> wrote:

>  Brandon,
>
> For 64-bit 256mb is a little low.  I would up that to at least a gigabyte
> if you can spare it.  What processor are you running? and how much
> motherboard ram do you have?
>
> Most of my work (particularly on windows) is regional so never had to load
> more than 5 or so states. So it's possible that is an issue.  I think
> Darkblue_b (Brian Hamlin, wave if you are reading) has done much larger
> datasets so he might have a better idea.  Then again I think he runs on
> beefed up hardware with 16 cores and lots of RAM.
>
> If you can send me a sample address that would help.  Can send me off list
> if sensitive information.
>
> Thanks,
> Regina
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* postgis-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> postgis-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] *On Behalf Of *Brandon Abear
> *Sent:* Sunday, December 21, 2014 11:30 PM
> *To:* PostGIS Users Discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [postgis-users] Poor Geocoder Performance
>
>  Hi Regina,
>
> I will check out the update that you have uploaded.
>
> To answer your questions:
> 1) Yep, I ran the nation script before running the subsequent state
> scripts.
> 2) The test batch includes addresses in all of the continental states. If
> I am able to get the geocoder to run quickly enough, I will be geocoding
> millions of addresses.
> 3) I have all states loaded.
> 4) Windows 7 64-bit
> 5) PostgreSQL shared_buffer is 256mb
> 6) I am running the same version as you.
>
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:16 PM, Paragon Corporation <lr at pcorp.us> wrote:
>
>>  Brandon,
>>
>>
>> BTW: I recently uploaded PostGIS 2.1.5 on stackbuilder for 9.3 and 9.4
>> (still need to do for 9.2)  and I have made some fixes between 2.1.3 and
>> 2.1.5 of the geocoder so might be worthwhile upgrading.
>>
>> To upgrade doing a :
>>
>> ALTER EXTENSION postgis_tiger_geocoder UPDATE TO "2.1.5";
>> Couple of questions
>>
>> 1) Did you run the nation script? That is often the cause of this kind of
>> issue if that was not done before loading states
>> 2) Which area are you running?
>> 3) How many states do yo have loaded?  I can try to test out myself to
>> see if I can replicate the issue you are having.
>> 4) Are you running on 32-bit windows 7 or 64-bit
>> 5) What is your  PostgreSQL shared_buffers set to in postgresql.conf?
>> 6) What is the exact version of PostgreSQL 9.3 you are running:  SELECT
>> version();
>>
>> mine returns: PostgreSQL 9.3.5, compiled by Visual C++ build 1600, 64-bit
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Regina
>> PostGIS PSC member and Windows PostGIS package maintainer
>> http://www.postgis.us
>> http://postgis.net
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* postgis-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
>> postgis-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] *On Behalf Of *Brandon Abear
>> *Sent:* Sunday, December 21, 2014 10:21 PM
>> *To:* postgis-users at lists.osgeo.org
>> *Subject:* [postgis-users] Poor Geocoder Performance
>>
>>   I recently installed PostGIS 2.1.3 on a local PostgreSQL instance
>> (9.3). I imported the countrywide TIGER data set, installed the missing
>> indexes, and ran a vacuum analyze on everything.
>>
>> The geocoder is significantly slower than what is reported in the
>> documentation (http://postgis.net/docs/Geocode.html). The example takes
>> roughly 4 seconds to return a result while the documentation shows ~61ms.
>> There are other addresses which take nearly a minute to geocode. I ran
>> through a batch of 500 addresses to test, and only a handful returned a
>> rating under 20. I am running on Windows 7.
>>
>> I have looked through as many similar issues online as I could find. I
>> also changed some of the config settings such as shared_buffer, but the
>> performance increase was negligible. I am out of ideas. Has anyone run into
>> a similar issue and found a solution?
>>
>> Thank you for your time!
>>
>> --
>> *Brandon M. Abear*
>> *Carthage College, 2013*
>> Cell: (847) 848-3907
>> babear at carthage.edu
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> postgis-users mailing list
>> postgis-users at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Brandon M. Abear*
> *Carthage College, 2013*
> Cell: (847) 848-3907
> babear at carthage.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-users mailing list
> postgis-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
>



-- 
*Brandon M. Abear*
*Carthage College, 2013*
Cell: (847) 848-3907
babear at carthage.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-users/attachments/20141221/62ff6d1b/attachment.html>