You might find something useful here:
http://www.osdl.org/lab_activities/kernel_testing/osdl_database_test_suite/
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruno Tenorio Avila
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005
9:09 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject:
EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Kimi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 06 January 2000 19:05
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Benchmarks
>On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Differentiated Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. wrote:
>
>> b) There are quite a few things which you'd take
> While on the subject of vacuum. I wonder if
> Tom's time will be better utilized at figuring out how to
> get rid of vacuum all together rather than trying to fix
> it. Simply have that functionality replaced with a more
> modern way of data management and query optimization.
> That command was
While on the subject of vacuum. I wonder if
Tom's time will be better utilized at figuring out how to
get rid of vacuum all together rather than trying to fix
it. Simply have that functionality replaced with a more
modern way of data management and query optimization.
That command was nothing but
than, say, 30,000 rows.
#
# [Snip]
#
# -Original Message-
# From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
# Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2000 10:14 AM
# To: Dustin Sallings
# Cc: The Hermit Hacker; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Benchmarks
#
#
# > Untrue, vacuum is *extremely* importa
s, which can take damn near forever for any number of updates or
deletes greater than, say, 30,000 rows.
[Snip]
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2000 10:14 AM
To: Dustin Sallings
Cc: The Hermit Hacker; [EMAIL PROTECTED
> Untrue, vacuum is *extremely* important for updating statistics.
> If you have a lot of data in a table, and you have never vacuumed, you
> might as well not have any indices. It'd be nice if you could seperate
> the stat update from the storage reclaim. Actually, it'd be nice if you
> c
On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
# Okay, my understanding is that a vacuum does a 'cleanup', while a vacuum
# analyze does a cleanup *and* stats...
That may be correct, but the stats without a cleanup would be a
nice option. :) That would give me the ability to update my s
On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Dustin Sallings wrote:
> Untrue, vacuum is *extremely* important for updating statistics.
> If you have a lot of data in a table, and you have never vacuumed, you
> might as well not have any indices. It'd be nice if you could seperate
> the stat update from the storage
On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
# > d) Postgres manual recommends a nightly vacuum. I read this also a bit
# > late. This is equivalent of rebuild database. While this is in
# > progress all other clients wait for vacuum release locks. This is
# > really a handicap for a 24x7 app.
#
On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Differentiated Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. wrote:
> b) There are quite a few things which you'd take for granted in other DBs
> which postgres does not have. Quite late in the day I was shocked to find
> that postgres does not have roll-forward transaction logging. They have
Hi,
It was good that I have chanced upon your mail.
I'm currently implementing a very high performance reliability application
using postgres.
I'm risking lots of debate and criticism on what I have to say. This is
based on practical experience. I have decent experience is using DB2 and a
reason
12 matches
Mail list logo
