On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Mike McCann wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > We are in the fortunate situation of having more money than time to help
> > solve our PostgreSQL 9.1 performance problem.
> >
> > Our server hosts databases that are about
Thanks Igor.
I am going to test with pgbouncer. Will let you know.
Thanks,
Anne
-Original Message-
From: Igor Neyman [mailto:iney...@perceptron.com]
Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 7:04 PM
To: Anne Rosset; k...@rice.edu
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: RE: [PERFORM] Deteriorati
On 07/05/13 19:33, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 7 May 2013 07:32, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
On 07/05/13 18:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 7 May 2013 01:23, wrote:
I'm thinking that a variant of (2) might be simpler to inplement:
(I think Matt C essentially beat me to this suggestion - he originally
disco
On 7 May 2013 07:32, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> On 07/05/13 18:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 7 May 2013 01:23, wrote:
>>
>>> I'm thinking that a variant of (2) might be simpler to inplement:
>>>
>>> (I think Matt C essentially beat me to this suggestion - he originally
>>> discovered this issue).
On Tue, 2013-05-07 at 18:32 +1200, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> On 07/05/13 18:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On 7 May 2013 01:23, wrote:
> >
> >> I'm thinking that a variant of (2) might be simpler to inplement:
> >>
> >> (I think Matt C essentially beat me to this suggestion - he originally
> >> discove
