Hi.
I will be happy to hear your opinion which one is better - odbc_fdw or tds_fdw?
In terms of performance / stability / convenience.
(Pg on OpenSuse, MS SQL on Win2008 )
Thanks!
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
Hello Ben,
Looks like you need to tune autovacuum to be more aggressive. Make sure
autovacuum=ON (the default), increase autovacuum_max_workers (at least 1
per database, more if autovacuum is falling
behind), autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor to be ~half of the default and can
be set per table to be
Hello,
I'm building an app in Django and I want to have some functions
directly in postgres. I'd prefer to use pl/python for the functions as
it'd look better in Django migration files (python code within python
code, instead of using PLPGSQL).
But one of the functions I need to create
François Battail francois.batt...@sipibox.fr hat am 18. Mai 2015 um 16:07
geschrieben:
Dear List,
I would like to know if somebody is aware of tricks for optimizing
PostgreSQL settings for a read-only database.
you can set fillfactor to 100
alter table ... set (fillfactor = 100),
Hi,
Any kind of slowness on your archive directory may cause the archiving
process fall behind thus accumulating segment files in your cluster's
pg_xlog directory.
I assume that you are on PostgreSQL 9.4. Could you please check your
archiver status by typing select * from
On 5/18/2015 4:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
And easily I can upgrade this and what are the steps to upgrade,
kindly confirm?
On disk format for the same major version is compatible, so simply
install the new binaries and restart your server. The installation of
the new binaries
Le 18/05/2015 16:20, Andreas Kretschmer a écrit :
Thank you Andreas,
you can set fillfactor to 100
Yes, but it's already the default value according to documentation.
And you can disable VACUUM.
Already done ;-)
I was more dreaming of something like disable read write locks or
mutexes
Hello François,
- With read-only work loads you can make shared_buffers very large, like
40% of RAM available to the database. Usually you would keep it lower
because in a write heavy workload large shared_buffers causes checkpoints
to have huge IO, but since you are not making
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:54 AM, François Battail
francois.batt...@sipibox.fr wrote:
Le 18/05/2015 16:38, William Dunn a écrit :
* You can also run a CLUSTER command on one of your indexes to group
data that is frequently accessed together into the same segment of
disk so you can
Le 18/05/2015 16:38, William Dunn a écrit :
Thank you William,
* With read-only work loads you can make shared_buffers very large,
like 40% of RAM available to the database. Usually you would keep it
lower because in a write heavy workload large shared_buffers causes
checkpoints
Dear List,
I would like to know if somebody is aware of tricks for optimizing
PostgreSQL settings for a read-only database.
I have a big read-only database ( 1.10^9 records splitted into ~ 10
tables) using GiST and Btree indexes, no foreign keys on tables at all.
I believe that not doing
On 18/05/15 13:44, Sachin Srivastava wrote:
But currently my pg_xlog size is 60 GB and there are 3740 WAL file in
this folder and in Last week this was 400 GB(pg_xlog folder) and WAL
file were approx. 3. Due to archiving pg_xlog folder size is
decreasing now but it’s taking one week to
Hi all,
We have a large database with postgre 9.3 (300 Gb) and our queries are
(really) long for 6 days without changing anything.
After seeing our log, I saw that the same query on an old data was quick but
the same query with new data are really slow.
Let me show you a sample of my query on
Thank you for your quick answer !
And ... you are a genius :)
A simple analyse
resolved my problem.
Do We have to do it regularly ?
Thank you a lot !
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.nabble.com/My-index-doesn-t-write-anymore-but-read-tp5849689p5849699.html
Sent from
ben.play benjamin.co...@playrion.com wrote:
Thank you for your quick answer !
And ... you are a genius :)
Yeah, i know ;-)
A simple analyse
resolved my problem.
Do We have to do it regularly ?
it's running regulary (via vacuum-process), but you can (and should) run
it after mass
Hi Filip,
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski
filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi.
I will be happy to hear your opinion which one is better - odbc_fdw or
tds_fdw?
In terms of performance / stability / convenience.
(Pg on OpenSuse, MS SQL on Win2008 )
Thanks!
I'm
Thank you Geoff.
Actually I have a problem - maybe you can point me in the right direction?
CREATE EXTENSION tds_fdw;
CREATE EXTENSION
CREATE SERVER ms FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER tds_fdw OPTIONS (servername 'ms');
CREATE SERVER
CREATE USER MAPPING FOR postgres SERVER ms
OPTIONS (username 'bzzt',
Le 18/05/2015 17:20, William Dunn a écrit :
Hello William,
Hello François - the CLUSTER command doesn't have to do with where your
indexes are. What the CLUSTER command does is physically sort the table
data based on the index (Doc:
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski
filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you Geoff.
Actually I have a problem - maybe you can point me in the right direction?
CREATE EXTENSION tds_fdw;
CREATE EXTENSION
CREATE SERVER ms FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER tds_fdw OPTIONS
ben.play benjamin.co...@playrion.com wrote:
Hi all,
We have a large database with postgre 9.3 (300 Gb) and our queries are
(really) long for 6 days without changing anything.
After seeing our log, I saw that the same query on an old data was quick but
the same query with new data are
Hi Michael,
So, as per your suggestion I'll update my database from 9.1.2 to 9.1.15.
Kindly confirm, which year this 9.1.2 was released and when 9.1.15 was
released.
And easily I can upgrade this and what are the steps to upgrade, kindly
confirm?
Regards,
Sachin
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at
Sachin Srivastava schrieb am 18.05.2015 um 12:04:
Kindly confirm, which year this 9.1.2 was released and when 9.1.15 was
released.
That information is part of the release notes:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/release-9-1-2.html
Hi,
I have done below changes in my postgresql.conf.
*Checkpoint_segments= 200*
and
*checkpoint_timeout= 5min*
I am also doing archiving and below changes in my postgresql.conf.
*Wal_level=archive*
*archive_command= cp %p /dbkup/momacpp_213_live/%f*
*archive_mode=on*
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Sachin Srivastava ssr.teleat...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Michael,
So, as per your suggestion I'll update my database from 9.1.2 to 9.1.15.
Kindly confirm, which year this 9.1.2 was released and when 9.1.15 was
released.
And easily I can upgrade this and what
24 matches
Mail list logo
