Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 16:09, Jürgen Rose wrote:
Sorry, but I better use this email address, I just hate to use Outlook
for this stuff.
To Peter Eisentraut
Yes, I've read the chapter in the manual.
To Michael Glaesemann
locally I run the database on my laptop (Dell
Apparently postgresql runs at 11% to 45% of normal speed in VMware
workstation. Basically it could be about 1/10th the performance for OLTP
stuff.
See here:
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/performance.html
(Notice also that the web server performance is less than 30% of native).
On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 01:50, Jürgen Rose wrote:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
A couple of points:
1: You wouldn't buy the QE II (a big luxery liner) and complain that it
doesn't work well for water skiing and is too complex. It's the QE II.
I don't get that argument.
The real point is
Sorry, but I better use this email address, I just hate to use Outlook
for this stuff.
To Peter Eisentraut
Yes, I've read the chapter in the manual.
To Michael Glaesemann
locally I run the database on my laptop (Dell D800) 1 GB Ram, but there
within VMWARE with 512MB assigned RAM. But the
On 9/6/05, Jürgen Rose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did some serious stuff with SQLServer and Interbase, and I had
**never** those performance problems.
On a laptop? Under VMWare?
I have used MSSQL Server too, and find PostgreSQL to compare favorably
in most cases. You may have found a
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_Rose?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
enough of ranting, but I'm totally frustrated
So are we, because you haven't provided nearly enough detail to let
anyone help you. A complete test case would be good, for instance.
regards, tom lane
On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 16:09, Jürgen Rose wrote:
Sorry, but I better use this email address, I just hate to use Outlook
for this stuff.
To Peter Eisentraut
Yes, I've read the chapter in the manual.
To Michael Glaesemann
locally I run the database on my laptop (Dell D800) 1 GB Ram,
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-09-05 09:39:47 +0200:
I working now for a wile with postgres (7.4), and I have the impression
that is one of the slowest dbms with which I've aver worked. Can please
somebody explain to me, why this is the case?
Because the default configuration (is | seems to
Have you set your stats appropriately?
I've been wondering about how high to set these - is there any
performance downside to pumping up the statistics count on a table? I
presume ANALYZE will take longer, and the planner might take a tiny bit
longer, but otherwise, it can't hurt, correct?
