On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 12:17 AM, Carlo Stonebanks
wrote:
> Our DB has an audit table which is 500M rows and growing. (FYI the objects
> being audited are grouped semantically, not individual field values).
>
> Recently we wanted to add a new feature and we altered the table to add a
> new column.
Hi,
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I think you need to see about getting this rowcount estimate to be more
> accurate:
>
>> -> Index Scan using idx_link_1 on link
>> (cost=0.00..680.51 rows=13477 width=26) (actual time=5.707..12.043
>> rows=126 loops=1)
>>
Our DB has an audit table which is 500M rows and growing. (FYI the objects
being audited are grouped semantically, not individual field values).
Recently we wanted to add a new feature and we altered the table to add a
new column. We are backfilling this varchar(255) column by writing a TCL
sc
On 7/01/2010 10:44 AM, Dmitri Girski wrote:
Hi everybody,
Many thanks to everyone replied, I think we are on the right way.
I've used tcpdump to generate the logs and there are a lot of dropped
packets due to the bad checksum. Network guy is currently looking at the
problem and most likely this
Jesper Krogh wrote:
Is it possible to get PG to tell me, how many rows that fits in a
disk-page. All columns are sitting in "plain" storage according to \d+
on the table.
select relname,round(reltuples / relpages) as "avg_rows_per_page" from
pg_class where relpages > 0;
--
Greg Smith2nd
Ron Mayer wrote:
>> ...The inner sets are on average 3.000 for
>> both id1 and id2 and a typical limit would be 100, so if I could convince
>> postgresql to not fetch all of them then I would reduce the set retrieved
>> by around 60. The dataset is quite large so the random query is not very
>> lik
Hi,
I am going to test this out but would be good to know anyways. A large
table is joined to a tiny table (8 rows) on a text field. Should I be
joining on an int field eg: recid intead of name? Is the performance
affected in either case?
Thanks .
Inheritance would only make sense if each of your categories had more
columns. Say if you had a "wines" category and only they had a year column.
Its probably not worth it for one or two columns but if you've got a big
crazy heterogeneous tree of stuff then its probably appropriate.
I'm with Ric
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Dmitri Girski wrote:
> Hi everybody,
> Many thanks to everyone replied, I think we are on the right way.
> I've used tcpdump to generate the logs and there are a lot of dropped
> packets due to the bad checksum. Network guy is currently looking at the
> problem and
Hi everybody,
Many thanks to everyone replied, I think we are on the right way.
I've used tcpdump to generate the logs and there are a lot of dropped
packets due to the bad checksum. Network guy is currently looking at the
problem and most likely this is hardware issue.
Cheers,
Dmitri.
On Tue, J
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Jesper Krogh wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have a table that consists of somewhere in the magnitude of 100.000.000
> rows and all rows are of this tuples
>
> (id1,id2,evalue);
>
> Then I'd like to speed up a query like this:
>
> explain analyze select id from table where id1 =
Zintrigue wrote:
I'm hoping the inheritance feature will be a nice alternative method for
me to implement categories in particular database of products I need to
keep updated. I suppose in MySQL I would probably do this by creating,
for example, one table for the products, and then a table(s)
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Zintrigue wrote:
> I'm wondering if there's any performance penalty here, analogous to the
> penalty of JOINs in a regular RDBMS (versus an ORDBMS).
> If anyone can offer in any insight as too how inheritance is actually
> executed (compared to JOINs especially), I'
Hello,
I am complete noob to Postgres and to this list, and I hope this will be the
appropriate list for this question.
I'm hoping the inheritance feature will be a nice alternative method for me
to implement categories in particular database of products I need to keep
updated. I suppose in MySQL
Jesper Krogh wrote:
> I have a table that consists of somewhere in the magnitude of 100.000.000
> rows and all rows are of this tuples
>
> (id1,id2,evalue);
>
> Then I'd like to speed up a query like this:
>
> explain analyze select id from table where id1 = 2067 or id2 = 2067 order
> by evalue
Hi.
I have a table that consists of somewhere in the magnitude of 100.000.000
rows and all rows are of this tuples
(id1,id2,evalue);
Then I'd like to speed up a query like this:
explain analyze select id from table where id1 = 2067 or id2 = 2067 order
by evalue asc limit 100;
Dave Crooke wrote:
The fact that the delays are clustered at (3 + 0.2 n) seconds, rather
than a distributed range, strongly indicates a timeout and not
(directly) a resource issue.
3 seconds is too fast for a timeout on almost any DNS operation, unless
it has been modified, so I'd suspect it'
The fact that the delays are clustered at (3 + 0.2 n) seconds, rather than a
distributed range, strongly indicates a timeout and not (directly) a
resource issue.
3 seconds is too fast for a timeout on almost any DNS operation, unless it
has been modified, so I'd suspect it's the TCP layer, e.g. pe
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Craig Ringer
wrote:
> Wireshark is your friend.
+1. I think if you put a packet sniffer on the interface you are
connecting from it will become clear what the problem is in short
order.
...Robert
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@po
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010, Dmitri Girski wrote:
On the other hand, if I use ip addresses this should not attract any possible
issues with
DNS, right?
Not true. It is likely that the server program you are connecting to will
perform a reverse DNS lookup to work out who the client is, for logging or
20 matches
Mail list logo
