On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 13:16 +0800, Selva manickaraja wrote:
> Thanks for the enlightenment. I will then look into other tools that
> help
> with performance testing. Is pgbench really useful? We need to produce
> the
> reports and statistics to our management as we are planning to migrate
> one
> s
Thanks for the enlightenment. I will then look into other tools that help
with performance testing. Is pgbench really useful? We need to produce the
reports and statistics to our management as we are planning to migrate one
system at a time from Informix. This is to ensure that we do not overload
t
Dear all,
I have a query that i used to fire many times in our application and
need to be tuned at the deeper level.
Query :
explain analyze select p.crawled_page_id, p.content,
w.publication_name, w.country_name, p.publishing_date,m.doc_category
,l.display_name as location, l.lat, l.lon, l.
Selva manickaraja wrote:
The reason I had to compile is because there are no binaries for
regression tests and the documentation requires us to make-install.
The reason for that is there is little reason for users of the database
to ever run those. Most (possibly all) of the the packaged buil
On 03/02/2011 06:12 PM, sverhagen wrote:
Thanks for your help already!
Hope you're up for some more :-)
Andy Colson wrote:
First off, excellent detail.
Second, your explain analyze was hard to read... but since you are not
really interested in your posted query, I wont worry about looking at
I followed the advice from Melton Low and was able to make and make-install.
The reason I had to compile is because there are no binaries for regression
tests and the documentation requires us to make-install.
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 13:19
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Does anyone have the hardware to test FlashCache with PostgreSQL?
> >
> > http://perspectives.mvdirona.com/2010/04/29/FacebookFlashcache.aspx
> >
> > I'd be interested to hear how it perf
Thanks for your help already!
Hope you're up for some more :-)
Andy Colson wrote:
>
> First off, excellent detail.
>
> Second, your explain analyze was hard to read... but since you are not
> really interested in your posted query, I wont worry about looking at
> it... but... have you seen:
>
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 13:19 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Selva manickaraja
> wrote:
> > We have installed PostgreSQL9 and setup standby(s). Now we have to test the
> > performance before we migrate all the data from Informix. The PostgreSQL9
> > that we installed
On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Selva manickaraja wrote:
> We have installed PostgreSQL9 and setup standby(s). Now we have to test the
> performance before we migrate all the data from Informix. The PostgreSQL9
> that we installed is the Linux version from EnterpriseDB which runs on Red
> Hat. T
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Bhakti Ghatkar wrote:
> Tom,
> The query which you gave returns me 0 rows.
> select ctid,xmin,xmax,* from pg_index where indexrelid in
> (select indexrelid from pg_index group by 1 having count(*)>1);
> Regards,
> Bhakti
How about just select ctid,xmin,
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Craig James writes:
>> Then I thought maybe putting a foreign-key constraint on table "my_version"
>> would solve the problem:
>
>> alter table my_version add constraint fk_my_view foreign key(version_id)
>> references registry.version(ver
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Does anyone have the hardware to test FlashCache with PostgreSQL?
>
> http://perspectives.mvdirona.com/2010/04/29/FacebookFlashcache.aspx
>
> I'd be interested to hear how it performs ...
It'd be a lot more interesting if it were a write-throu
On 2 March 2011 19:52, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 2 March 2011 19:38, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Dave Johansen
>>> wrote:
I also just noticed that an ORDER BY x LIMIT n optimization is not pushed
down thr
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 2 March 2011 19:38, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Dave Johansen
>> wrote:
>>> I also just noticed that an ORDER BY x LIMIT n optimization is not pushed
>>> down through the UNION ALL as well. I understand that this
On 2 March 2011 19:38, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Dave Johansen
> wrote:
>> I also just noticed that an ORDER BY x LIMIT n optimization is not pushed
>> down through the UNION ALL as well. I understand that this may be a little
>> trickier because the ORDER BY and LIM
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
> I also just noticed that an ORDER BY x LIMIT n optimization is not pushed
> down through the UNION ALL as well. I understand that this may be a little
> trickier because the ORDER BY and LIMIT would need to be applied to the
> subqueries and
17 matches
Mail list logo
