Hi Merlin et al.
after building postgres 9.4 myself from sources I get the same performance as
with 9.3. The difference was in the value of debug_assertions setting.
Now the next step. Why my 3 years old laptop gets x1.8 times more tps than my
one month old server?
And Mark Kirkwood's desktop
On 24/09/14 21:23, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
Hi Merlin et al.
after building postgres 9.4 myself from sources I get the same performance as
with 9.3. The difference was in the value of debug_assertions setting.
Now the next step. Why my 3 years old laptop gets x1.8 times more tps than my
one
With pg_test_timing I can see, that overhead is 48 nsec on my server and 32
nsec on the laptop.
what makes this difference and have it any influence on the overall performance?
Tigran.
- Original Message -
From: Mark Kirkwood mark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz
To: Tigran Mkrtchyan
On 09/23/2014 11:37 PM, Emi Lu wrote:
Hello list,
For a big table with more than 1,000,000 records, may I know which update is
quicker please?
(1) update t1
set c1 = a.c1
from a
where pk and
t1.c1a.c1;
..
update t1
set
Hello,
For a big table with more than 10 Million records, may I know which update is
quicker please?
(1) update t1
set c1 = a.c1
from a
where pk and
t1.c1a.c1;
..
update t1
set c_N = a.c_N
from a
where pk
Hi Tigran,
my debugging tips:
Some technical details:
Host: rhel 6.5 2.6.32-431.23.3.el6.x86_64
256 GB RAM, 40 cores, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2660 v2 @ 2.20GHz
2x160GB PCIe SSD DELL_P320h-MTFDGAL175SAH
As I know PCIe SSD DELL_P320h = Micron P320h
(
On 25/09/14 01:03, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
With pg_test_timing I can see, that overhead is 48 nsec on my server and 32
nsec on the laptop.
what makes this difference and have it any influence on the overall performance?
Hmm - 22 nsec for my workstation, so while it could be a factor, your
