This is kind of OT, unless somebody really is concerned with
understanding the + and - of distributions, and is willing to believe
the content of this thread as being accurate and objective... :-)
On 10/04/2009 08:42 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Mark Mielke wrote:
Hi Xia,
Try this patch:
http://treehou.se/~omar/postgresql-8.4.1-array_sel_hack.patch
It's a hack, but it works for us. I think you're probably spending
most of your query time planning, and this patch helps speed things up
10x over here.
Regards,
Omar
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Xia Qing
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Mark Mielke wrote:
> On 10/01/2009 03:44 PM, Denis Lussier wrote:
>>
>> I'm a BSD license fan, but, I don't know much about *BSD otherwise (except
>> that many advocates say it runs PG very nicely).
>>
>> On the Linux side, unless your a dweeb, go with a newer, popu
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 4:45 PM, wrote:
> All:
>
> We have a web-application which is growing ... fast. We're currently
> running on (1) quad-core Xeon 2.0Ghz with a RAID-1 setup, and 8GB of RAM.
>
> Our application collects a lot of sensor data, which means that we have 1
> table which has about
All:
We have a web-application which is growing ... fast. We're currently
running on (1) quad-core Xeon 2.0Ghz with a RAID-1 setup, and 8GB of RAM.
Our application collects a lot of sensor data, which means that we have 1
table which has about 8 million rows, and we're adding about 2.5 million
r
On Sun, 4 Oct 2009, Devrim G?ND?Z wrote:
On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 10:05 -0400, Mark Mielke wrote:
RHEL and CentOS are particular bad *right now*. See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RHEL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS
For RHEL, look down to "Release History" and RHEL 5.3 based
On Sun, 4 Oct 2009, Mark Mielke wrote:
On 10/04/2009 01:55 PM, Devrim GÜNDÜZ wrote:
On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 10:05 -0400, Mark Mielke wrote:
So any comparisons between operating system *distributions* should be
fair. Comparing a 2007 release to a 2009 release, for example, is not
fair. RHEL / Ce
On 10/04/2009 01:55 PM, Devrim GÜNDÜZ wrote:
On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 10:05 -0400, Mark Mielke wrote:
So any comparisons between operating system *distributions* should be
fair. Comparing a 2007 release to a 2009 release, for example, is not
fair. RHEL / CentOS are basically out of the running
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 2:11 AM, S Arvind wrote:
>> > Thanks Robert,
>> > So for our scenario what is the most important factor to be
>> > noted
>> > for performance.
>>
>> Tou
On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 10:05 -0400, Mark Mielke wrote:
>
> RHEL and CentOS are particular bad *right now*. See here:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RHEL
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS
>
> For RHEL, look down to "Release History" and RHEL 5.3 based on
> Linux-2.6.18, released Marc
On 10/01/2009 03:44 PM, Denis Lussier wrote:
I'm a BSD license fan, but, I don't know much about *BSD otherwise
(except that many advocates say it runs PG very nicely).
On the Linux side, unless your a dweeb, go with a newer, popular &
well supported release for Production. IMHO, that's RHEL
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 2:11 AM, S Arvind wrote:
> > Thanks Robert,
> > So for our scenario what is the most important factor to be
> noted
> > for performance.
>
> Tough to say without benchmarking, but if you have a lot of small
> da
Hi,
there are several performance related issues, thereby it's rather
difficult to answer your question shortly.
You have to keep in mind not only postgres itself, hardware is also an
important factor.
Do you have performance problems, which you can describe more detailed ?
regards..GERD..
13 matches
Mail list logo
