Just as a question to Tom and team,
I saw a post a bit ago, about plans for 8.4, and Tom said it is very
likely that 8.4 will rewrite subselects into left joins, is it still
in plans?
I mean query like:
select id from foo where id not in ( select id from bar);
into:
select f.id from foo f left
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:14 AM, marcin mank marcin.m...@gmail.com wrote:
Just as a question to Tom and team,
maybe it`s time for asktom.postgresql.org? Oracle has it :)
hehe,
on the other hand - that would make my ppl here very skilfull, the
only reason I started to praise them about joins,
Just as a question to Tom and team,
maybe it`s time for asktom.postgresql.org? Oracle has it :)
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009, Scott Carey wrote:
For anyone worried about the X 25–M’s ability to withstand lots of write
cycles ... Calculate how long it would take you to write 800TB to the
drive at a typical rate. For most use cases that’s going to be 5
years. For the 160GB version, it will take
=?UTF-8?Q?Grzegorz_Ja=C5=9Bkiewicz?= gryz...@gmail.com writes:
I mean query like:
select id from foo where id not in ( select id from bar);
into:
select f.id from foo f left join bar b on f.id=b.id where b.id is null;
Postgres does not do that, because they don't mean the same thing ---
the
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
=?UTF-8?Q?Grzegorz_Ja=C5=9Bkiewicz?= gryz...@gmail.com writes:
I mean query like:
select id from foo where id not in ( select id from bar);
into:
select f.id from foo f left join bar b on f.id=b.id where b.id is null;
Hi,
I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under three
environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same machine as GNU/Linux) and
Solaris-SPARC. I think you might find it interesting:
On Friday 20 February 2009, Sergio Lopez sergio.lo...@nologin.es wrote:
Hi,
I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under three
environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same machine as GNU/Linux) and
Solaris-SPARC. I think you might find it interesting:
El Fri, 20 Feb 2009 08:36:44 -0800
Alan Hodgson ahodg...@simkin.ca escribió:
On Friday 20 February 2009, Sergio Lopez sergio.lo...@nologin.es
wrote:
Hi,
I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under
three environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same machine as
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Sergio Lopez sergio.lo...@nologin.eswrote:
Hi,
I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under three
environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same machine as GNU/Linux) and
Solaris-SPARC. I think you might find it interesting:
El Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:39:41 -0500
Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.com escribió:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Sergio Lopez
sergio.lo...@nologin.eswrote:
Hi,
I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under
three environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same
First of all, you need to do some research on the benchmark kit itself,
rather than blindly downloading and using one. BenchmarkSQL has significant
bugs in it which affect the result. I can say that authoritatively as I
worked on/with it for quite awhile. Don't trust any result that comes
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Sergio Lopez sergio.lo...@nologin.eswrote:
On the other hand, I've neved said that what I've done is the
Perfect-Marvelous-Definitive Benchmark, it's just a personal project,
and I don't have an infinite amount of time to invest on it.
When you make comments
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
First of all, you need to do some research on the benchmark kit itself,
rather than blindly downloading and using one. BenchmarkSQL has
significant
bugs in it which affect the result. I can say that authoritatively
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.comwrote:
Having this said, the benchmark is not as unfair as you thought. I've
taken care to prepare all databases to meet similar values for their
cache, buffers and I/O configuration (to what's possible given their
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Sergio Lopez sergio.lo...@nologin.es
wrote:
On the other hand, I've neved said that what I've done is the
Perfect-Marvelous-Definitive Benchmark, it's just a personal project,
and
I have a server box that has 4GB of RAM, Quad core CPU AMD Opteron 200.152
Mhz (1024 KB cache size each) with plenty of hard drive space.
I installed both postgresql 8.2.6 and 8.3.3 on it. I've created a basic
test db and used
pgbench -i -s 1 -U test -h localhost test
to create a sample test db.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
ISTM you are the one throwing out unsubstantiated assertions without
data to back it up. OP ran benchmark. showed hardware/configs, and
demonstrated result. He was careful to hedge expectations and gave
rationale for
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 04:34:23PM -0500, Battle Mage wrote:
I have a server box that has 4GB of RAM, Quad core CPU AMD Opteron 200.152
Mhz (1024 KB cache size each) with plenty of hard drive space.
I installed both postgresql 8.2.6 and 8.3.3 on it. I've created a basic
test db and used
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Battle Mage battlem...@gmail.com wrote:
The amount of tps almost doubled, which is good, but i'm worried about the
load. For my application, a load increase is bad and I'd like to keep it
just like in 8.2.6 (a load average between 3.4 and 4.3). What parameters
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
ISTM you are the one throwing out unsubstantiated assertions without
data to back it up. OP ran benchmark. showed hardware/configs, and
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Battle Mage battlem...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a server box that has 4GB of RAM, Quad core CPU AMD Opteron 200.152
Mhz (1024 KB cache size each) with plenty of hard drive space.
I installed both postgresql 8.2.6 and 8.3.3 on it. I've created a basic
test db
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
ISTM you are the one throwing out unsubstantiated assertions
Robert Haas wrote:
The biggest flaw in the benchmark by far has got to be that it was
done with a ramdisk, so it's really only measuring CPU consumption.
Measuring CPU consumption is interesting, but it doesn't have a lot to
do with throughput in real-life situations.
... and memory
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 6:14 AM, marcin mank marcin.m...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:56 AM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz gryz...@gmail.com
wrote:
Just as a question to Tom and team,
maybe it`s time for asktom.postgresql.org? Oracle has it :)
+1
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing
El Fri, 20 Feb 2009 14:48:06 -0500
Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.com escribió:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Sergio Lopez
sergio.lo...@nologin.eswrote:
Having this said, the benchmark is not as unfair as you thought. I've
taken care to prepare all databases to meet similar values
El Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:54:58 -0500
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com escribió:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Jonah H. Harris
jonah.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Merlin Moncure
mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
ISTM you are the one throwing out unsubstantiated
Hi,
I have a 8 GB database, and 2 GB table. In a query i use the 2 GB table and
several other tables where it takes around 90 minutes for execution.
In different places, it takes drastically different time. Say everywhere i
have the same,
OS - Debian.
Primary memory - 3 GB
PostgreSQL
28 matches
Mail list logo
