On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 15:07:29 +0530, Shridhar Daithankar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only worry is database size. Postgresql is 111GB v/s 87 GB for mysql.
Shridhar,
here is an implementation of a set of user types: char3, char4,
char10. Put the attached files into a new directory contrib/fixchar,
On 9 Oct 2002 at 10:00, Manfred Koizar wrote:
On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 15:07:29 +0530, Shridhar Daithankar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only worry is database size. Postgresql is 111GB v/s 87 GB for mysql.
Shridhar,
here is an implementation of a set of user types: char3, char4,
char10. Put
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 05:42:12PM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
Hackers, do you think it's possible to hack together a quick and dirty
patch, so that string length is represented by one byte? IOW can a
database be built that doesn't contain any char/varchar/text value
longer
On 3 Oct 2002 at 8:54, Charles H. Woloszynski wrote:
I'd be curious what happens when you submit more queries than you have
processors (you had four concurrent queries and four CPUs), if you care
to run any additional tests. Also, I'd report the query time in
absolute (like you did) and
On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 15:07:29 +0530, Shridhar Daithankar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only worry is database size. Postgresql is 111GB v/s 87 GB for mysql. All
numbers include indexes. This is really going to be a problem when things are
deployed. Any idea how can it be taken down?
Shridhar,
if
On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 19:48:31 +0530, Shridhar Daithankar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I say if it's a char field, there should be no indicator of length as it's not
required. Just store those many characters straight ahead..
This is out of reach for a quick hack ...
Sure. But the server machine is
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
Well, we were comparing ext3 v/s reiserfs. I don't remember the journalling
mode of ext3 but we did a 10 GB write test. Besides converting the RAID to RAID-
0 from RAID-5 might have something to do about it.
That will have a massive, massive
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
Our major concern remains load time as data is generated in real time and is
expecetd in database with in specified time period.
If your time period is long enough, you can do what I do, which is
to use partial indexes so that the portion of the
Can you comment on the tools you are using to do the insertions (Perl,
Java?) and the distribution of data (all random, all static), and the
transaction scope (all inserts in one transaction, each insert as a
single transaction, some group of inserts as a transaction).
I'd be curious what
On 3 Oct 2002 at 19:33, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On 3 Oct 2002 at 13:56, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
It's one hell of a DB you're building. I'm sure I'm not the only one interested
so to satisfy those of us who are nosey: can you say what the application is?
I'm sure we'll all understand
On 3 Oct 2002 at 8:54, Charles H. Woloszynski wrote:
Can you comment on the tools you are using to do the insertions (Perl,
Java?) and the distribution of data (all random, all static), and the
transaction scope (all inserts in one transaction, each insert as a
single transaction, some
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
snip
Was the original posting on GENERAL or HACKERS. Is this moving the
PERFORMANCE for follow-up? I'd like to follow this discussion and want
to know if I should join another group?
Shall I subscribe to performance? What's the exat list name? Benchmarks? I
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 10:56, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
Well, we were comparing ext3 v/s reiserfs. I don't remember the journalling
mode of ext3 but we did a 10 GB write test. Besides converting the RAID to RAID-
0 from RAID-5 might have something to do about it.
There was a discussion on
On 3 Oct 2002 at 11:23, Greg Copeland wrote:
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 10:56, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
Well, we were comparing ext3 v/s reiserfs. I don't remember the journalling
mode of ext3 but we did a 10 GB write test. Besides converting the RAID to RAID-
0 from RAID-5 might have
14 matches
Mail list logo
