On 2/9/21 8:21 AM, John English wrote:
On 09/02/2021 18:05, Rick Hillegas wrote:
As Bryan points out, please consult the Tuning Guide for information
on how to view your query plan. In any event, your descending index
is not a covering index. That is, it does not contain all of the
columns in
On 08/02/2021 18:43, Rick Hillegas wrote:
I would recommend throwing more memory at your JVM or adding a
descending index to system_log.time.
So, there is already a descending index to system_log.time, and I've
upped the heap to 2GB. I also added the time taken to service the
request as an
I think Rick was suggesting that if you got the right query plan,
using your index as efficiently as possible, then that would be the
best solution? You can find a lot of information about this in
http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/10.15/tuning/
Perhaps your statistics are inaccurate, so Derby is
On 09/02/2021 18:05, Rick Hillegas wrote:
As Bryan points out, please consult the Tuning Guide for information on
how to view your query plan. In any event, your descending index is not
a covering index. That is, it does not contain all of the columns in
your query. That may be what forces the
