What is random_page_cost and seq_page_cost in your server?
And how many rows does the table have?
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Grzegorz Olszewski <
grzegorz.olszew...@outlook.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder why planner uses Seq Scan instead of Index Scan.
>
> Here is my table (partial):
> con
Hi,
I wonder why planner uses Seq Scan instead of Index Scan.
Here is my table (partial):
content.contents
-+-+-
id | bigint | niepusty do
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 4:06 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> I just learned that NFS does not use a file system cache on the client
> side.
>
My experience suggested that it did something a little weirder than that.
It would cache read data as long as it was clean, but once the data was
dirtied and wr
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > All that said, there has always been a recommendation of caution around
> > using NFS as a backing store for PG, or any RDBMS..
>
> I know that Oracle recommends it - they even built an NFS client
> into their database
On 5/27/2014 9:09 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
On 05/27/2014 10:00 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
I know that Oracle recommends it - they even built an NFS client
into their database server to make the most of it.
That's odd. Every time the subject of NFS comes up, it's almost
immediately shot down wit
On 05/27/2014 10:00 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
I know that Oracle recommends it - they even built an NFS client
into their database server to make the most of it.
That's odd. Every time the subject of NFS comes up, it's almost
immediately shot down with explicit advice to Never Do That(tm). It c
Stephen Frost wrote:
> All that said, there has always been a recommendation of caution around
> using NFS as a backing store for PG, or any RDBMS..
I know that Oracle recommends it - they even built an NFS client
into their database server to make the most of it.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Sent vi
* Heikki Linnakangas (hlinnakan...@vmware.com) wrote:
> On 05/27/2014 02:06 PM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> >I just learned that NFS does not use a file system cache on the client side.
> >
> >On the other hand, PostgreSQL relies on the file system cache for
> >performance,
> >because beyond a certain a
On 05/27/2014 02:06 PM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
I just learned that NFS does not use a file system cache on the client side.
On the other hand, PostgreSQL relies on the file system cache for performance,
because beyond a certain amount of shared_buffers performance will suffer.
Together these thing
I just learned that NFS does not use a file system cache on the client side.
On the other hand, PostgreSQL relies on the file system cache for performance,
because beyond a certain amount of shared_buffers performance will suffer.
Together these things seem to indicate that you cannot get good pe
10 matches
Mail list logo
