Do you have the proper indexes on the columns that you're fetching?

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Kevin Ball <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hmm.. can you give more info on which constraint cures the problem?  I
> wonder if you end up getting rows back in a different order, and so either
> do or don't sort?  Are you using any ordering constraints?
>
> -Kevin
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Guyren Howe <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 29, 2011, at 2:03 PM, James Miller wrote:
>>
>> > I would agree with Kevin.  You're likely swapping pretty quick with only
>> 512MB on the machine, especially if you're expecting to return 3500 rows --
>> did you try a larger slice?
>> >
>> > Try running `free -m` on the slice to see your current memory state
>> while that monster query is running.
>>
>> I did try a 1GB slice, which made no difference whatever.
>>
>> I just found that removing one of the constraints — which would, if
>> anything, give me more rows — cures the problem.
>>
>> So I have a workaround. But there’s an ugly issue lurking there somewhere.
>>
>> --
>> SD Ruby mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
>>
>
>  --
> SD Ruby mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
>

-- 
SD Ruby mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby

Reply via email to