Hello everyone
I must be doing something very wrong here so help please! I have two tables
tableA has 300,000 recs
tableB has 20,000 recs
I need to set the value of a field in table A to a value in table B depending
on the existence of the record in table B. So what I have done is
UPDATE
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:47:57 +0300, Ksenia Marasanova
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Seq Scan on user_ (cost=0.00..7430.63 rows=12763 width=245)
(actual time=360.431..1120.012 rows=12763 loops=1)
If 12000 rows of the given size are stored in more than 7000 pages, then
there is a lot of free
Hilary Forbes wrote:
I need to set the value of a field in table A to a value in table B depending
on the existence of the record in table B. So what I have done is
UPDATE tableA set a.val1=b.somefield FROM tableA a, tableB b WHERE
a.key1=b.key1;
Check the EXPLAIN carefully, are you sure
The difference between the 7.4 driver and the 8.0.3 driver is the
8.0.3 driver is using server side prepared statements and binding the
parameter to the type in setXXX(n,val).
The 7.4 driver just replaces the ? with the value and doesn't use
server side prepared statements.
Dave
On
On 12.09.2005, at 14:38 Uhr, Dave Cramer wrote:
The difference between the 7.4 driver and the 8.0.3 driver is the
8.0.3 driver is using server side prepared statements and binding
the parameter to the type in setXXX(n,val).
Would be a good idea when this were configurable.
I found my
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The difference between the 7.4 driver and the 8.0.3 driver is the
8.0.3 driver is using server side prepared statements and binding the
parameter to the type in setXXX(n,val).
The 7.4 driver just replaces the ? with the value and doesn't use
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 10:14:25 +0100,
Hilary Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everyone
I must be doing something very wrong here so help please! I have two tables
tableA has 300,000 recs
tableB has 20,000 recs
I need to set the value of a field in table A to a value in table B
Hilary Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I need to set the value of a field in table A to a value in table B depending
on the existence of the record in table B. So what I have done is
UPDATE tableA set a.val1=b.somefield FROM tableA a, tableB b WHERE
a.key1=b.key1;
You've written an
On 12-Sep-05, at 9:22 AM, Guido Neitzer wrote:
On 12.09.2005, at 14:38 Uhr, Dave Cramer wrote:
The difference between the 7.4 driver and the 8.0.3 driver is the
8.0.3 driver is using server side prepared statements and binding
the parameter to the type in setXXX(n,val).
Would be a
It's added, just use the old protocol .
Here are the connection parameters
http://jdbc.postgresql.org/documentation/head/connect.html#connection-
parameters
Dave
On 12-Sep-05, at 9:26 AM, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The difference between
I'm in the process of developing an application which uses PostgreSQL
for data storage. Our database traffic is very atypical, and as a
result it has been rather challenging to figure out how to best tune
PostgreSQL on what development hardware we have, as well as to figure
out exactly what we
I know I haven't provided a whole lot of application-level detail here,
You did !
What about :
- using COPY instead of INSERT ?
(should be easy to do from the aggregators)
- using Bizgres ?
(which was designed for your
"Brandon Black" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote ...
Increasing shared_buffers seems to always help, even out to half of
the dev box's ram (2G).
Though officially PG does not prefer huge
shared_buffers size, I did see several times thatperformancewas
boosted in case IO is the
Split your system into multiple partitions of RAID 10s.For max
performance, ten drive RAID 10 for pg_xlog (This will max out a
PCI-X bus) on Bus A, multiple 4/6Drive RAID 10s for tablespaces on Bus
B. For max performance I would recommend using one RAID 10 for raw data
tables, one for aggregate
On 9/12/05, PFC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know I haven't provided a whole lot of application-level detail here,You did !What about :- using COPY instead of INSERT ?(should
be easy to do from the aggregators)
Possibly, although it would kill the current design of returning the
database
Brandon Black wrote:
On 9/12/05, *PFC* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- benchmarking something else than ext3
(xfs ? reiser3 ?)
We've had bad experiences under extreme and/or strange workloads with
XFS here in general, although this
Brandon Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The vast, overwhelming majority of our database traffic is pretty much a
non-stop stream of INSERTs filling up tables.
That part Postgres should handle pretty well. It should be pretty much limited
by your I/O bandwidth so big raid 1+0 arrays are
On 9/12/05, Brandon Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm in the process of developing an application which uses PostgreSQL for
data storage. Our database traffic is very atypical, and as a result it has
been rather challenging to figure out how to best tune PostgreSQL on what
development
On 12 Sep 2005 23:07:49 -0400, Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The WAL parameters like commit_delay and commit_siblings are a bit of amystery. Nobody has done any extensive testing of them. It would be quite
helpful if you find anything conclusive and post it. It would also besurprising if
On 9/12/05, Christopher Petrilli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) Tune ext3.The default configuration wrecks high-write situations. Look into data="" for mounting, turning off atime (I hopeyou've done this already) updates, and also modifying the scheduler to
the elevator model.This is poorly
Andrew, Matthew, thanks to you both four your advice. I'm sorry I couldn't
provide more details to the situation, I will post again as soon I get them.
Time to share your insights with the colleagues :)
Best Regards,
Chris
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Paul Ramsey [mailto:[EMAIL
From: Brandon Black [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sep 12, 2005 5:04 PM
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: [PERFORM] Performance considerations for very heavy INSERT traffic
I'm in the process of developing an application which uses PostgreSQL for
data storage. Our database traffic is very
22 matches
Mail list logo
