> To: Benjamin Krajmalnik
> Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance question
>
> Please cc the list so others can learn and help.
>
> Yes, if ODBC is tearing the connection down after every call,
> performance *WILL* suck. Setup some kind of persisten
mp or timestamp without
> timezone?
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jim Nasby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 5:53 PM
> > To: Benjamin Krajmalnik
> > Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
> > Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Perfo
Are you sure you're doing an apples-apples comparison? Is the load on
both machines the same, or does production have extra stuff running?
Have you tried your original test again in the same setup without
ODBC to eliminate that possibility? (or redone your original test
with ODBC).
As for
I am battling a performance issue and was wondering if someone could
help. PostgreSQL 8.1.5, FreeBSD.
I have a very intense stored procedure which performs real time
aggregation of data.
I captured the stored procedure calls from a production system and
pumped them through psql, logging duration
* david drummard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> thanks very much for the response. Are there any special commands to analyze
> the index before using the table. If i rename the table, will the indexes
> still stay with the table ( i hope so).
You want to run 'analyze ' after you've created the inde
hi stephen,
thanks very much for the response. Are there any special commands to
analyze the index before using the table. If i rename the table, will
the indexes still stay with the table ( i hope so).
best regards
vijay erantiOn 2/10/06, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* david drummar
* david drummard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> My question is what is the best way to do step (1) so that after the copy is
> done, the table is fully indexed and properly balanced and optimized for
> query.
> Should i create indexes before or after import ? I need to do this in
> shortest period o
I have an unique requirement. I have a feed of 2.5 - 3 million rows of
data which arrives every 1/2 an hour. Each row has 2 small string
values (about 50 chars each) and 10 int values. I need
searcheability and running arbitrary queries on any of these values.
This means i have to create an index
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aldor) writes:
> I'm curious how other people do it:
>
> What is faster?
>
> 1. CREATE TABLE
> 2. restore data
> 3. CREATE INDEX
>
> or
>
> 1. CREATE TABLE
> 2. CREATE INDEX
> 3. restore data
Creating the index AFTER loading the data is definitely faster. But
by all means do yo
On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 01:30:53AM +0100, Aldor wrote:
> What is faster?
>
> 1. CREATE TABLE
> 2. restore data
> 3. CREATE INDEX
>
> or
>
> 1. CREATE TABLE
> 2. CREATE INDEX
> 3. restore data
See "Populating a Database" in the "Performance Tips" chapter of
the documentation:
http://www.postgre
Hi,
I'm curious how other people do it:
What is faster?
1. CREATE TABLE
2. restore data
3. CREATE INDEX
or
1. CREATE TABLE
2. CREATE INDEX
3. restore data
Thanks,
Aldor
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
in
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance Question
The long and short of it is that you should never need to restart
either the main server or postgres in order to achieve better
performance. If the issue is that you are not vacuuming frequently
enough, then you might consider pg_autovacuum, which is
more info will be helpful, please let me know!
Many thanks
-Original Message-
From: Thomas F. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 March 2005 08:09 PM
To: Werner vd Merwe
Cc: PgSQL Admin
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance Question
The long and short of it is that you should
No, I mean JDBC version, not JDK version.
go to jdbc.postgresql.org and download newest version of JDBC to
have a try.
regards laser
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining colum
what' your JDBC version?
if it's pretty old, then upgrade to newest one is a bet.
Don't know if it could solve the problem, but old
version of JDBC did have some problem in transaction
handling, we've experienced such problem not so long
before.
regards laser
---(end of broa
records in, with 15 fields,
around
15000 records per day added.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thomas
F.O'Connell
Sent: 14 March 2005 06:37 PM
To: Werner vd Merwe
Cc: PgSQL Admin
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance Question
Well, the
-Original Message-
From: weiping [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 15 March 2005 05:55 PM
To: Werner vd Merwe
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance Question
what' your JDBC version?
if it's pretty old, then upgrade to newest one is a bet.
Don't k
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Nicholson
Sent: 15 March 2005 05:33 PM
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance Question
Werner vd Merwe wrote:
>Output of VACUUM ANALYSE VERBOSE pg_listener:
>
>Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.06 sec)
>INFO: vacuuming &qu
d Nicholson
Sent: 14 March 2005 07:10 PM
To: PgSQL Admin
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance Question
I'm wondering if long running transacations might be the cause (you'll
likely want to do this while perfomance is suffering).
Have a look at pg_stat_activity and see if there are any lon
F.O'Connell
Sent: 14 March 2005 06:37 PM
To: Werner vd Merwe
Cc: PgSQL Admin
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance Question
Well, there's always the dbsize module in contrib to check actual size
on disk. I was thinking more in terms of approximate numbers of tables
and rows in those tables.
-tfo
-
ly slow. Not broken after the vacuum, it is a gradual
decline in performance.
Hope that makes more sense.
Many thanks
-Original Message-
From: Thomas F. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 14 March 2005 05:59 PM
To: Werner vd Merwe
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN
Original Message-
From: Thomas F. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 14 March 2005 05:59 PM
To: Werner vd Merwe
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance Question
I think you need to provide more information to get any help with your
setup.
For one thing, why are you
From: Thomas F. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 14 March 2005 05:59 PM
To: Werner vd Merwe
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Performance Question
I think you need to provide more information to get any help with your
setup.
For one thing, why are you "restart
I think you need to provide more information to get any help with your
setup.
For one thing, why are you "restarting"? Are you restarting the server?
Postgres? In general, there should be no need to restart either.
Next, what do you mean by "broken bad" after a full vacuum?
-tfo
--
Thomas F.
Hi guys,
I have been browsing around and reading up on PostgreSQL
performance to try and tweak our system at the office, as its performance is
not that great.
Many people say that PG is a great DB, and I know that our
problems are purely a setup issue.
After a complete server re
Is restarting postmaster on a regular basis necessary for performance?
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "pgsql-admin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 2:20 PM
Subject: Followup Re: [ADMIN] Performance qu
OK, I seem to have fixed my own problem here again, sorry. I restarted
the postmaster, now _all_ queries are about 10x faster, and the first
execution on a new connection is no longer significantly slower than
the second. The server (and the original postmaster) had been up for:
11:18AM up 1
When I execute a query on a new connection, the performance is many
times slower than if the query is repeated. In other words, if I start
psql, execute the query, then repeat it immediately, the second time it
takes only about 20% as long to execute. Now here's the confusing
part, if I exit
Brian McCane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since I am using a strict alphabet like this, would it be faster to build
> PostgreSQL without Multibyte support? Or has the indexing, etc. been
> optimized so much for multibyte that it is actually faster than single
> byte stuff?
A non-multibyte build
First of all, I have somewhat fixed my locking problems from before, at
least to the point that the app is mostly usable. I will tweak it more
later, when I have some more free time to myself :)
Now:
I use an english alphabet exclusively in an app I am working on
for another customer. I
30 matches
Mail list logo
