This is with PostgreSQL 9.5.6 on Debian Linux.
I noticed that according to pg_stat_user_tables autoanalyze has never
run on a lot of tables. Here is one example:
wdsah=> select * from pg_stat_user_tables where schemaname='public' and
relname='facttable_wds_indexstats';
─[ RECORD 1 ]───┬─
On 28.02.2017 17:33, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 02/26/2017 03:26 AM, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
Hello everyone,
playing around with jsonb and coming from this SO question
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19925641/check-if-a-postgres-json-array-contains-a-string
I wonder why PostgreSQL behaves dif
On 03/03/2017 01:31, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:42 PM, scott ribe wrote:
Is it reasonable to run PG on a mirrored pair of something like the Intel SSD
DC 3610 series? (For example:
http://ark.intel.com/products/82935/Intel-SSD-DC-S3610-Series-480GB-2_5in-SATA-6Gbs-20nm-MLC)
On 03.03.2017 06:26, George Neuner wrote:
I know most people here don't pay much - or any - attention to
SQLServer, however there was an interesting article recently regarding
significant performance differences between DISTINCT and GROUP BY as
used to remove duplicates.
https://sqlperformance.c
On 1 March 2017 at 14:23, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
> I don't consider rolling an UDF the best alternative especially after
> having looked through many solution proposals on the Web which just take an
> mutable expression and wrap them up in an immutable function.
>
One alternative would be to make
On 03.03.2017 11:43, Geoff Winkless wrote:
One alternative would be to make to_date accept all language variants
of months simultaneously. A quick search of google suggests that there
aren't any overlaps between languages (ie where one language uses
"Foo" for March and another uses "Foo" for Ma
Hello,
Is there a way to force the backend to send a PortalSuspended message to the
front-end? Perhaps emulate a particular load or a specific sequence of sql
commands sent from the front-end?
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscri
On 03.03.2017 11:43, Geoff Winkless wrote:
One alternative would be to make to_date accept all language variants
of months simultaneously. A quick search of google suggests that there
aren't any overlaps between languages (ie where one language uses
"Foo" for March and another uses "Foo" for M
Le 27 févr. 2017 à 10:32, Oleg Bartunov écrivait :
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nicolas Paris wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> AFAIK there is no built-in way to combine full text search and fuzzy
> matching
> (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/fuzzystrmatch.html).
>
On 3 March 2017 at 12:17, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
> On 03.03.2017 11:43, Geoff Winkless wrote:
>
> One alternative would be to make to_date accept all language variants of
> months simultaneously. A quick search of google suggests that there aren't
> any overlaps between languages (ie where one lan
On 03.03.2017 15:49, Nicolas Paris wrote:
Hi Oleg,
Thanks. I thought pgtrgm was not able to index my long texts because of
limitation of 8191 bytes per index row for btree.
Then I found out it is possible to use pgtrgm over a GIN/GIST index.
My final use case is phrase mining in texts.
I want
Le 03 mars 2017 à 14:08, Artur Zakirov écrivait :
> On 03.03.2017 15:49, Nicolas Paris wrote:
> >
> >Hi Oleg,
> >
> >Thanks. I thought pgtrgm was not able to index my long texts because of
> >limitation of 8191 bytes per index row for btree.
> >
> >Then I found out it is possible to use pgtrgm over
On 3 March 2017 at 18:26, George Neuner wrote:
> I know most people here don't pay much - or any - attention to
> SQLServer, however there was an interesting article recently regarding
> significant performance differences between DISTINCT and GROUP BY as
> used to remove duplicates.
>
> https://s
On 03.03.2017 16:17, Nicolas Paris wrote:
Nice ! I do have 9.6 version.
Would this kind of index could handle more than 20M large texts ? The
recheck condition looks ressource consuming.
You are right. I think pg_trgm will be not good for such large texts,
unfortunately.
The full text ind
On 03/03/2017 12:33 AM, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
This is with PostgreSQL 9.5.6 on Debian Linux.
I noticed that according to pg_stat_user_tables autoanalyze has never
run on a lot of tables. Here is one example:
wdsah=> select * from pg_stat_user_tables where schemaname='public' and
relname='fact
On 03/02/2017 01:09 PM, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
On 28.02.2017 17:33, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 02/26/2017 03:26 AM, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
Hello everyone,
playing around with jsonb and coming from this SO question
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19925641/check-if-a-postgres-json-array-contains-a
Rui Pacheco writes:
> Is there a way to force the backend to send a PortalSuspended message to
> the front-end?
In your Execute message, request fewer rows than you know the portal will
produce.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@po
Hi.
I am new, and not sure which mailinglist this should go to, so I start
with the general list. (please advice, if I should send this to a more
specific list)
This is tested with postgresql 9.5.5 (Maybe someone can confirm, if it
is the same with later versions, saving me the work to upgrade
Hi,
following up my own post:
I noted that I included the "set enable_seqscan=off; ". But the results
I mentioned are from before this statement.
I also compared some more statements
explain analyze verbose select min(id) from tbl_foo where created_at >=
'2017-01-15' ;
explain analyze verbo
Martin F writes:
>Index Cond: (tbl_foo.id IS NOT NULL)
> only "id" is the pk, and declared "not null".
> So why this index condition?
The IS NOT NULL condition is generated as part of transforming a "min(x)"
query into an indexscan, on the basis that "select min(x) from ..." is
equivalent to
Hi,
following up my own post:
I noted that I included the "set enable_seqscan=off; ". But the results
I mentioned are from before this statement.
I also compared some more statements
explain analyze verbose select min(id) from tbl_foo where created_at >=
'2017-01-15' ;
explain analyze verbo
Thanks Michael- That was indeed the issue. We have a very complex wrapper
application that walks the server through multiple state transitions, and
it turned out that in the state I was running the query from, streaming
replication wasn't configured.
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 4:36 PM Michael Paquier
On 03/03/2017 17:33, Tom Lane wrote:
Martin F writes:
Index Cond: (tbl_foo.id IS NOT NULL)
only "id" is the pk, and declared "not null".
So why this index condition?
You're right that we could observe that the NOT NULL is implied by a table
constraint and drop it, but it seems unlikely to
On 03/03/2017 17:33, Tom Lane wrote:
Martin F writes:
The select with filter choose an IMHO better plan
Index Only Scan using tbl_foo_date on public.tbl_foo
But the bigger picture here, which would become more obvious if you were
working with a non-toy amount of data, is that you're asking th
On 03.03.2017 16:05, Adrian Klaver wrote:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/functions-json.html
As to why it works on JSON arrays:
Table 9-43. Additional jsonb Operators
"
? text Does the string exist as a top-level key within the
JSON value?
"
So to be picky it not does cal
On 03/03/2017 11:50 AM, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
On 03.03.2017 16:05, Adrian Klaver wrote:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/functions-json.html
As to why it works on JSON arrays:
Table 9-43. Additional jsonb Operators
"
? text Does the string exist as a top-level key within the
J
Hi David,
On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 02:32:48 +1300, David Rowley
wrote:
>On 3 March 2017 at 18:26, George Neuner wrote:
>> I know most people here don't pay much - or any - attention to
>> SQLServer, however there was an interesting article recently regarding
>> significant performance differences be
27 matches
Mail list logo
