On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 10:22:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Also, there is a whole lot of one-time-per-statement overhead that can
be amortized across many rows instead of only one. Stuff like opening
the target table, looking up the per-column I/O conversion functions,
identifying trigger
Thank you for the swift reply.
The test server is hardly ever vacuumed as it in general sees very
limited traffic. vacuum is only necessary if the server sees a lot of
write operations, i.e. update, delete, insert right?
What explains the different choice of query plans then?
As can be seen
On Fri, 6 May 2005, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
Has thought been given to supporting inserting multiple rows in a single
insert? DB2 supported:
INSERT INTO table VALUES(
(1,2,3),
(4,5,6),
(7,8,9)
);
I'm not sure how standard that is or if other databases support it.
The sql
Results of VACUUM VERBOSE from both servers
Test server:
comm=# VACUUM VERBOSE StatCon_Tbl;
INFO: --Relation public.statcon_tbl--
INFO: Pages 338: Changed 338, Empty 0; Tup 11494: Vac 0, Keep 0,
UnUsed 0.
Total CPU 0.02s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.04 sec.
INFO: --Relation pg_toast.pg_toast_179851--
You didn't do analyze.
Chris
Jona wrote:
Results of VACUUM VERBOSE from both servers
Test server:
comm=# VACUUM VERBOSE StatCon_Tbl;
INFO: --Relation public.statcon_tbl--
INFO: Pages 338: Changed 338, Empty 0; Tup 11494: Vac 0, Keep 0, UnUsed 0.
Total CPU 0.02s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.04
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Dennis Bjorklund [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 6 May 2005, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
Has thought been given to supporting inserting multiple rows in a single
insert? DB2 supported:
INSERT INTO table VALUES(
(1,2,3),
(4,5,6),
(7,8,9)
);
I'm not sure how
Now with analyze
Test Server:
comm=# VACUUM ANALYZE VERBOSE StatCon_Tbl;
INFO: --Relation public.statcon_tbl--
INFO: Pages 338: Changed 0, Empty 0; Tup 11494: Vac 0, Keep 0, UnUsed 0.
Total CPU 0.02s/0.00u sec elapsed 1.98 sec.
INFO: --Relation pg_toast.pg_toast_179851--
INFO: Pages
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 01:51:29 -0500,
Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 10:22:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Also, there is a whole lot of one-time-per-statement overhead that can
be amortized across many rows instead of only one. Stuff like opening
the target
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has thought been given to supporting inserting multiple rows in a single
insert?
It's on the TODO list. I don't remember anyone bringing this up for about
a year now, so I doubt anyone is actively working on
while you weren't looking, Derek Buttineau|Compu-SOLVE wrote:
I'm hoping this is the right place to send this.
The PostgreSQL Performance list, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
would be more appropriate. I'm copying my followup there, as well.
As for your query, almost all the time is actually
Thanks for the response :)
That's 50-ish ms versus 80-odd seconds.
It seems to me a merge join might be more appropriate here than a
nestloop. What's your work_mem set at? Off-the-cuff numbers show the
dataset weighing in the sub-ten mbyte range.
Provided it's not already at least that big, and
After reading the comparisons between Opteron and Xeon processors for Linux,
I'd like to add an Opteron box to our stable of Dells and Sparcs, for
comparison.
IBM, Sun and HP have their fairly pricey Opteron systems.
The IT people are not swell about unsupported purchases off ebay.
Anyone care
Mischa,
What kind of budget are you on? penguincomputing.com deals with
Opteron servers. I looked at a couple of their servers before deciding
on a HP DL145.
Ian
On 5/6/05, Mischa Sandberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After reading the comparisons between Opteron and Xeon processors for Linux,
IBM, Sun and HP have their fairly pricey Opteron systems.
The IT people are not swell about unsupported purchases off ebay.
Mischa,
I certainly understand your concern, but the price and support
sometimes go hand-in-hand. You may have to pick your batttles if your
want more bang for the buck
Please wait a week before buying Sun v20z's or v40z's from off of Ebay
(j/k). (As I'm in the process of picking up a few) From everything I
hear the v20z/v40z's are a great way to go and I'll know more in 15 days
or so.
Regards,
Gavin
Steve Poe wrote:
IBM, Sun and HP have their fairly pricey
15 matches
Mail list logo
