Tobias Brox wrote:
[Madison Kelly - Mon at 08:10:12AM -0500]
to run, which puts it into your "drawback" section. The server in
question is also almost under load of some sort, too.
A great tip and one I am sure to make use of later, thanks!
I must have been sleepy, listing up "cons" vs "drawbacks" ;-)
:) I noticed but figured what you meant (I certainly do similar flubs!).
Anyway, the central question is not the size of the job, but the size of
the transactions within the job - if the job consists of many
transactions, "my" test can be run before every transaction. Having
transactions lasting for hours is a very bad thing to do, anyway.
Ah, sorry, long single queries is what you meant. I have inherited this
code so I am not sure how long a given query takes, though they do use a
lot of joins and such, so I suspect it isn't quick; indexes aside. When
I get some time (and get the backup server running) I plan to play with
this. Currently the DB is on a production server so I am hesitant to
poke around just now. Once I get the backup server though, I will play
with your suggestions. I am quite curious to see how it will work out.
Thanks again!
Madi
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
