Mark Wong escribió:
Hrm, tracking just the launcher process certainly doesn't help. Are
the spawned processed short lived? I take a snapshot of
/proc/pid/io data every 60 seconds.
The worker processes can be short-lived, but if they are, obviously they
are not vacuuming the large tables.
Hi everyone!
I have a very large 2-column table (about 500M records) from which I want to
remove duplicate records.
I have tried many approaches, but they all take forever.
The table's definition consists of two short TEXT columns. It is a
temporary table generated from a query:
CREATE TEMP
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Kynn Jones kyn...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
I have a very large 2-column table (about 500M records) from which I want to
remove duplicate records.
I have tried many approaches, but they all take forever.
The table's definition consists of two short TEXT
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 12:25:48 -0500
Kynn Jones kyn...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
I have a very large 2-column table (about 500M records) from which I want to
remove duplicate records.
I have tried many approaches, but they all take forever.
The table's definition consists of two short
You don't say what PG version you are on, but just for kicks you may try
using GROUP BY instead of DISTINCT. Yes, the two should perform the
same, but with 8.1 (or maybe 8.0) I had seen situations where GROUP BY
was faster (admittedly this happened with more complex queries). So, try
this:
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:14 AM, George Pavlov gpav...@mynewplace.com wrote:
You don't say what PG version you are on, but just for kicks you may try
using GROUP BY instead of DISTINCT. Yes, the two should perform the
same, but with 8.1 (or maybe 8.0) I had seen situations where GROUP BY
was
Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:14 AM, George Pavlov gpav...@mynewplace.com wrote:
You don't say what PG version you are on, but just for kicks you may try
using GROUP BY instead of DISTINCT. Yes, the two should perform the
same, but with 8.1 (or maybe 8.0) I had seen situations
