joël Winteregg wrote:
Hi Richard,
Here is my problem. With some heavy insert into a simple BD (one
table, no indexes) i can't get better perf than 8000 inserts/sec. I'm
testing it using a simple C software which use libpq and which use:
- Insert prepared statement (to avoid too many request
joël Winteregg wrote:
No, as said above transactions are made of 10 inserts...
Hmm - I read that as just meaning inserted 10 rows. You might find
that smaller batches provide peak performance.
Ahh ok ;-) sorry for my bad english... (yeah, i have been testing
several transaction size
* Richard Huxton dev@archonet.com [070306 12:22]:
2. You can do a COPY from libpq - is it really not possible?
Not really but i have been testing it and inserts are flying (about
10 inserts/sec) !!
What's the problem with the COPY? Could you COPY into one table then insert
from that
Andreas Kostyrka wrote:
* Richard Huxton dev@archonet.com [070306 12:22]:
2. You can do a COPY from libpq - is it really not possible?
Not really but i have been testing it and inserts are flying (about
10 inserts/sec) !!
What's the problem with the COPY? Could you COPY into one table
* Richard Huxton dev@archonet.com [070306 13:47]:
Andreas Kostyrka wrote:
* Richard Huxton dev@archonet.com [070306 12:22]:
2. You can do a COPY from libpq - is it really not possible?
Not really but i have been testing it and inserts are flying (about
10 inserts/sec) !!
What's the
In response to Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Bricklen Anderson wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Ravindran G-TLS,Chennai. wrote:
Note: Please bear with us for the disclaimer because it is automated in
the exchange server.
Regards,
Ravi
FYI, we are getting closer to
Bill Moran wrote:
I'm curious, what problem does the disclaimer cause?
I wrote the following TOS for my personal system:
https://www.potentialtech.com/cms/node/9
Excerpt of the relevant part:
If you send me email, you are granting me the unrestricted right to use
the contents of that email
I'm curious, what problem does the disclaimer cause?
I wrote the following TOS for my personal system:
https://www.potentialtech.com/cms/node/9
Excerpt of the relevant part:
I have no idea if that's legally binding or not, but I've talked to a few
associates who have some experience in
On 3/5/07, Guido Neitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 05.03.2007, at 19:56, Alex Deucher wrote:
Yes, I started setting that up this afternoon. I'm going to test that
tomorrow and post the results.
Good - that may or may not give some insight in the actual
bottleneck. You never know but it
Craig A. James [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bill Moran wrote:
I have no idea if that's legally binding or not, but I've talked to a few
associates who have some experience in law, and they all argue that email
disclaimers probably aren't legally binding anyway -- so the result is
undefined.
On Mar 5, 2007, at 8:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Hm, the cost for the upper nestloop is way less than you would expect
given that the HASH IN join is going to have to be repeated 100+
times.
I think this must be due to a very low join_in_selectivity estimate
but I'm not sure why you are getting
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Craig A. James [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bill Moran wrote:
I have no idea if that's legally binding or not, but I've talked to a few
associates who have some experience in law, and they all argue that email
disclaimers probably aren't legally binding
At 10:25 AM 3/6/2007, Alex Deucher wrote:
On 3/5/07, Guido Neitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 05.03.2007, at 19:56, Alex Deucher wrote:
Yes, I started setting that up this afternoon. I'm going to test that
tomorrow and post the results.
Good - that may or may not give some insight in the
Hello,
Is anyone aware of some test-suite for Postgresql?
Thanks,
Neelam
Csaba Nagy wrote:
I only know to answer your no. 2:
2) What about the issue with excessive locking for foreign keys when
inside a transaction? Has that issue disappeared in 8.2? And if not,
would it affect similarly in the case of multiple-row inserts?
The exclusive lock is gone
On 3/6/07, Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 10:25 AM 3/6/2007, Alex Deucher wrote:
On 3/5/07, Guido Neitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 05.03.2007, at 19:56, Alex Deucher wrote:
Yes, I started setting that up this afternoon. I'm going to test that
tomorrow and post the results.
Good - that
Neelam Goyal wrote:
Is anyone aware of some test-suite for Postgresql?
What do you want to test? PostgreSQL itself or some application using
it? Do you want to do performance testing or functional regression
testing, perhaps?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB
On Mar 6, 2007, at 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
the *actual* average number of rows scanned is 3773. I'm not sure why
this should be --- is it possible that the distribution of keys in
symptom_reports is wildly uneven? This could happen if all of the
physically earlier rows in symptom_reports
Hi,
I have database with a huge amount of data so i'm trying to make it as fast as
possible and minimize space.
One thing i've done is join on a prepopulated date lookup table to prevent a
bunch of rows with duplicate date columns. Without this I'd have about 2500
rows per hour with the exact
I think I have an issue with the planning of this query that sometimes
runs really slow.
this is the output of the EXPLAIN ANALYZE in the SLOW case
Sort (cost=4105.54..4105.54 rows=2 width=28) (actual
time=11404.225..11404.401 rows=265 loops=1)
Sort Key: table1.fdeventfromdate,
I see that one can now get compact flash to SATA connectors.
If I were to use a filesystem with noatime etc and little non-sql traffic,
does the physical update pattern tend to have hot sectors that will tend to
wear out CF?
I'm wondering about a RAID5 with data on CF drives and RAID1 for teh
On 3/7/07, James Mansion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see that one can now get compact flash to SATA connectors.
If I were to use a filesystem with noatime etc and little non-sql traffic,
does the physical update pattern tend to have hot sectors that will tend to
wear out CF?
I'm wondering about
Hi List,
Can i find out the timestamp when last a record from a table got updated.
Do any of the pg system tables store this info.
--
Regards
Gauri
am Wed, dem 07.03.2007, um 12:13:55 +0530 mailte Gauri Kanekar folgendes:
Hi List,
Can i find out the timestamp when last a record from a table got updated.
Do any of the pg system tables store this info.
No, impossible. But you can write a TRIGGER for such tasks.
Andreas
--
Andreas
24 matches
Mail list logo
