On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:40:21AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
- We're on SLES 10 SP 2 and are handling a web site which gets two to
- three million hits per day, running tens of millions of queries, while
- functioning as a replication target receiving about one million
- database transactions to
Laszlo Nagy writes:
> On a 8 processor system, my stats collector is always at 100% CPU.
> 8.3.5 on FreeBSD 7.0 amd64
Hmm. How many tables in the installation? Or perhaps more to the
point, how large is $PGDATA/global/pgstat.stat? It might be that
it's just spending too much time dumping out
Matthew Wakeling writes:
> The final cumulative time is 5894.06 seconds, which doesn't seem to match
> the query run time at all.
Depending on the platform you're using, gprof might have the wrong idea
about the kernel's tick rate, leading to its numbers being some multiple
or fraction of the tr
David Kerr wrote:
> We'll be on 8.4 (or 8.5) by the time we go live and SLES linux (for
> now). I don't have hardware yet, basically, we'll purchase enough
> hardware to handle whatever we need...
>
> Is anyone willing to share their max connections and maybe some
> rough hardware sizing (cpu
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
...the size of the join relation was estimated long before we even
started to think about nestloop-with-inner-indexscan plans.
That makes a lot of sense.
Matthew
--
Richards' Laws of Data Security:
1. Don't buy a computer.
2. If you must buy a computer, do
Matthew Wakeling writes:
> If I look at the actual results of the outer-most join, the nested loop,
> then I can take the number rows=344491124 and divide it by loops=361427 to
> get rows=953. Clearly this means that on average each index scan on a3
> returned 953 rows.
Right.
> However, if I
Please ignore - Matthew has discovered what was blocking this message.
Use his thread instead.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performan
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Richard Huxton wrote:
Send it to the list again, and cc: me directly if you like. If it doesn't
show up in the next 20 minutes, I'll try sending it.
Okay, here we go. I have (per Tom's advice) found some acknowledgement
knobs on Majordomo. Here follows my original rejected
Alright. I have finally worked out why I was being censored. Majordomo
doesn't like subject lines beginning with the word "help". It by default
sends your message off to the moderators and doesn't tell you. Now follows
my original mail:
Hi. I thought by now I would be fairly good at understa
Matthew Wakeling writes:
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Scott Mead wrote:
>> Are you getting a bounce message? They usually have the reason in there.
> No, I am not getting any bounce message.
IIRC, getting a bounce message for rejected or held-for-moderation
submissions is a configurable subscription
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Scott Mead wrote:
Are you getting a bounce message? They usually have the reason in there.
No, I am not getting any bounce message. My email just goes into a black
hole, and does not appear on the web site archives either.
Matthew
--
The only secure computer is one tha
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>
>> There is a limit on the size of the mail that you can send to different
>> mailing lists. Please try to remove/link your
>> attachments if you are trying to send any.
>>
>
> No, size is not an
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
There is a limit on the size of the mail that you can send to different mailing
lists. Please try to remove/link your
attachments if you are trying to send any.
No, size is not an issue - it's only 3kB.
Matthew
--
Q: What's the difference between ign
There is a limit on the size of the mail that you can send to different
mailing lists. Please try to remove/link your attachments if you are trying
to send any.
Best regards,
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Matthew Wakeling wrote:
>
> It appears that I am being censored. I have tried three time
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
Matthew Wakeling writes:
It appears that I am being censored.
Do you seriously think that censorman would kill your previous
mails, but would let a "It appears that I am being censored" mail
go through?
If it's an automatic program picking u
Matthew Wakeling writes:
> It appears that I am being censored.
Do you seriously think that censorman would kill your previous
mails, but would let a "It appears that I am being censored" mail
go through?
--
Guillaume Cottenceau
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@p
It appears that I am being censored. I have tried three times to send a
particular message to this list over the last few days, while a different
mail has gone through fine. There does not appear to be a publicised list
manager address, so I am addressing this complaint to the whole list. Is
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Matthew Wakeling wrote:
Do you have a recommendation for how to go about profiling Postgres, what
profiler to use, etc? I'm running on Debian Linux x86_64.
I mostly compile with --enable-profiling and use gprof. I know To
Hi,
Quoting "Greg Smith" :
What I'd love to have is a way to rent a fairly serious piece of
dedicated hardware
I'm just stumbling over newservers.com, they provide sort of a "cloud"
with an API but that manages real servers (well, blade ones, but not
virtualized). Their "fast" variant com
Tom Lane wrote:
Laszlo Nagy writes:
On a 8 processor system, my stats collector is always at 100% CPU.
What platform? What Postgres version?
regards, tom lane
8.3.5 on FreeBSD 7.0 amd64
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postg
20 matches
Mail list logo
