On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
My point being, no matter how terrible an idea a certain storage media
is, there's always a use case for it. Even if it's very narrow.
The trouble is, if extra subscribers induce load on the master,
which they
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Spreng)
wrote:
On 16.04.2008, at 17:42, Chris Browne wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Spreng) writes:
On 16.04.2008, at 01:24, PFC wrote:
The queries in question (select's) occasionally take up to 5 mins
even if they take
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Xiaoning Ding):
When I run multiple TPC-H queries (DBT3) on postgresql, I found the system
is not scalable. My machine has 8GB memory, and 4 Xeon Dual Core processor
( 8 cores in total). OS kernel is linux 2.6.9. Postgresql is 7.3.18. I
I think it might be caused by
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Staubo) wrote:
On Dec 12, 2006, at 13:32 , Michael Stone wrote:
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 12:29:29PM +0100, Alexander Staubo wrote:
I suspect the hardware's real maximum performance of the system is
~150 tps, but that the LSI's write cache is buffering the
writes.
Oops! [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel van Ham Colchete) was seen spray-painting on
a wall:
But, trust me on this one. It's worth it.
No, the point of performance analysis is that you *can't* trust the
people that say trust me on this one.
If you haven't got a benchmark where you can demonstrate a
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Stone), an
earthling, wrote:
[1] I will say that I have never seen a realistic benchmark of
general code where the compiler flags made a statistically
significant difference in the runtime.
When we were initially trying out
The world rejoiced as [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shane Ambler) wrote:
Chris Browne wrote:
In the case of a zip code? Sure. US zip codes are integer values
either 5 or 9 characters long.
So your app will only work in the US?
And only for US companies that only have US clients?
Sorry had to dig
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Broersma Jr):
By the way, wouldn't it be possible if the planner learned from a query
execution, so it would know if a choice for a specific plan or estimate
was actually correct or not for future reference? Or is that in the line
of DB2's complexity and a
On 8/28/06, Ravindran G - TLS, Chennai. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Alvaro.
We are using PostgreSQL 7.1 cygwin installed on Windows 2000.
We understand that the maximum connections that can be set is 64 in
Postgresql 7.1 version.
But our application is installed in 8 / 10 PC or more than
On 8/28/06, Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please advise us on how to resolve this ?.
There's no solution short of upgrading.
That's a little too negative. There is at least one alternative,
possibly two...
1. Migrate the database to a Unix platform that does not suffer from
the
On 8/28/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christopher Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 8/28/06, Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's no solution short of upgrading.
That's a little too negative. There is at least one alternative,
possibly two...
But both of those would
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ruben Rubio):
Hi, I have a question with shared_buffer.
Ok, I have a server with 4GB of RAM
-
# cat /proc/meminfo
MemTotal: 4086484 kB
[...]
-
So, if I want to, for example, shared_buffer to take 3 GB of RAM then
shared_buffer would be 393216 (3 *
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nis Jorgensen)
wrote:
J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
We have been using PostgreSQL on Opteron servers almost since the
Opteron was first released, running both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of
Linux. Both 32-bit and 64-bit versions have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Presley) wrote:
Hi all!
I had an interesting discussion today w/ an Enterprise DB developer and
sales person, and was told, twice, that the 64-bit linux version of
Enterprise DB (which is based on the 64-bit version of PostgreSQL 8.1)
is SIGNIFICANTLY SLOWER than
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex Turner)
wrote:
Anyone who has tried x86-64 linux knows what a royal pain in the ass
it is. They didn't do anything sensible, like just make the whole
OS 64 bit, no, they had to split it up, and put 64-bit libs in a new
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Dale) wrote:
p class=MsoNormalfont size=2 face=Arialspan style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'Event with the planning removed, the function still
performs
significantly slower than the raw SQL. Is that normal or am I doing something
wrong
with the creation or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jojo Paderes) wrote:
I'd like to know if the latest PostgreSQL release can scale up by
utilizing multiple cpu or dual core cpu to boost up the sql
executions.
I already do a research on the PostgreSQL mailing archives and only
found old threads dating back 2000. A lot of
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Marlowe)
wrote:
On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 10:43, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Has someone been working on the problem of splitting a query into pieces
and running it on multiple CPUs / multiple machines? Yes. Bizgress has
done
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Javier Somoza) would
write:
Hi all
I've a question about vacuuming, ...
Vacuum: cleans out obsolete and deleted registers...
Analyze: update statistics for the planner
After takin a swig o' Arrakan spice grog, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joshua D. Drake)
belched out:
Jeremy Haile wrote:
We are a small company looking to put together the most cost effective
solution for our production database environment. Currently in
production Postgres 8.1 is running on this
I'm curious as to why autovacuum is not designed to do full vacuum.
Because that's terribly invasive due to the locks it takes out.
Lazy vacuum may chew some I/O, but it does *not* block your
application for the duration.
VACUUM FULL blocks the application. That is NOT something that anyone
in our db system (for a website), i notice performance boosts after
a vacuum
full. but then, a VACUUM FULL takes 50min+ during which the db is
not really
accessible to web-users. is there another way to perform
maintenance tasks
AND leaving the db fully operable and accessible?
You're not
On 8 Jul 2005, at 20:21, Merlin Moncure wrote:
ditto windows.
Files cached in memory are slower than reading straight from memory
but not nearly enough to justify reserving memory for your use. In
other words, your O/S is a machine with years and years of
engineering designed best how to
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Amit V Shah) wrote:
I am all for postgres at this point, however just want to know why I am
getting opposite results !!! Both DBs are on the same machine
Why do you say opposite results ?
Please pardon my ignorance, but from whatever I
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, Morgan [EMAIL
PROTECTED] transmitted:
At first I was using straight insert statments, and although they
were a bit slower than the prepared statments(after the restablished
connection) they never ran into this problem with the database
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sebastian
Hennebrueder), an earthling, wrote:
I could not find any recommandations for the level of set statistics
and what a specific level does actually mean.
What is the difference between 1, 50 and 100? What is recommanded for
a
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Merlin Moncure)
wrote:
In practice, we have watched Windows evolve in such a fashion with
respect to multiuser support, and, in effect, it has never really
gotten it. Microsoft started by hacking something on top of MS-DOS,
and by
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Fradkin)
would write:
I am just testing the water so to speak, if it cant handle single
user tests then multiple user tests are kind of a waste of time.
I would suggest that if multi-user functionality is needed, then
starting
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Sander Røsnes):
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 17:50, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Anjan Dave wrote:
In terms of vendor specific models -
Does anyone have any good/bad experiences/recommendations for a
4-way Opteron from Sun (v40z, 6 internal drives) or HP (DL585 5
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex), an earthling,
wrote:
Christopher Browne wrote:
After takin a swig o' Arrakan spice grog, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex) belched
out:
i am thinking about swiching to plperl as it seems to me much more
flexible and easier to create
After takin a swig o' Arrakan spice grog, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex) belched out:
i am thinking about swiching to plperl as it seems to me much more
flexible and easier to create functions.
what is the recommended PL for postgres? or which one is most widely
used / most popular?
is there a
is large enough to cope with the growth between VACUUM cycles.
VACUUM FULL pushes the system away from equilibrium, thereby making
FSM estimates less useful.
--
cbbrowne,@,ca.afilias.info
http://dev6.int.libertyrms.com/
Christopher Browne
(416) 673-4124 (land)
---(end
After takin a swig o' Arrakan spice grog, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jaime Casanova)
belched out:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:41:09 -0800, Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com wrote:
Jaime,
Why is this query using a seq scan rather than a index scan?
Because it thinks a seq scan will be faster.
I will
The world rejoiced as [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Aufflick) wrote:
Hi All,
I have boiled my situation down to the following simple case:
(postgres version 7.3)
* Query 1 is doing a sequential scan over a table (courtesy of field
ILIKE 'foo%') and index joins to a few others
* Query 2 is doing
The world rejoiced as [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PFC) wrote:
As a side note, I learned something very interesting for our
developers here.
We had been doing a drop database and then a reload off a db dump
from our
live server for test data. This takes 8-15 minutes depending on the
server
(the
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us (Bruce Momjian) wrote:
William Yu wrote:
Well, that would give you the most benefit, but the memory
bandwidth is still greater than on a Xeon. There's really no
issue with 64 bit if you're using open source software; it all
compiles for 64 bits and you're good to
the data without putting a load
on the origin. And then pulling the schema from the origin, which
oughtn't be terribly expensive there.
--
cbbrowne,@,ca.afilias.info
http://dev6.int.libertyrms.com/
Christopher Browne
(416) 673-4124 (land)
---(end of broadcast
a generalized answer to star queries,
but it is an immediate answer for some cases.
--
cbbrowne,@,ca.afilias.info
http://dev6.int.libertyrms.com/
Christopher Browne
(416) 673-4124 (land)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Atkins) would
write:
As a bit of obPostgresql, though... While the registry for .org is
run on Postgresql, the actual DNS is run on Oracle. That choice was
driven by the availability of multi-master replication.
Like many of
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hervé
Piedvache) transmitted:
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:24, Christopher Kings-Lynne a écrit :
Is there any solution with PostgreSQL matching these needs ... ?
You want: http://www.slony.info/
Do we have to backport
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hervé Piedvache) wrote:
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 16:05, Joshua D. Drake a écrit :
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Or you could fork over hundreds of thousands of dollars for Oracle's
RAC.
No please do not talk about this again ... I'm
Quoth Ron Mayer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Merlin Moncure wrote:
...You need to build a bigger, faster box with lots of storage...
Clustering ... B: will cost you more, not less
Is this still true when you get to 5-way or 17-way systems?
My (somewhat outdated) impression is that up to about 4-way
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hervé Piedvache), an
earthling, wrote:
Joshua,
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:44, Joshua D. Drake a écrit :
Hervé Piedvache wrote:
My company, which I actually represent, is a fervent user of PostgreSQL.
We used to make all our
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Greg Stark)
wrote:
Dawid Kuroczko [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Quick thought -- would it be to possible to implement a 'partial VACUUM'
per analogiam to partial indexes?
No.
But it gave me another idea. Perhaps equally
Oops! [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud) was seen spray-painting on a
wall:
The .NET Runtime will be a part of the next MS SQLServer engine. You
will be able to have C# as a pl in the database engine with the next
version of MSSQL. That certainly will be something to think about.
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Miles Keaton):
I'm sorry if there's a URL out there answering this, but I couldn't
find it.
For those of us that need the best performance possible out of a
dedicated dual-CPU PostgreSQL server, what is recommended?
AMD64/Opteron or i386/Xeon?
Xeon sux pretty
Xeon sux pretty bad...
Linux or FreeBSD or _?_
The killer question won't be of what OS is faster, but rather of
what OS better supports the fastest hardware you can get your hands
on.
We tried doing some FreeBSD benchmarking on a quad-Opteron box, only
to discover that the fibrechannel
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pallav Kalva)
wrote:
Then you have to look at individual slow queries to determine why
they are slow, fortunately you are running 7.4 so you can set
log_min_duration to some number like 1000ms and then
try to analyze why those
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike G.) wrote:
Hi,
I have data that I am taking from 2 tables, pulling out specific columns and
inserting into one table.
Is it more efficient to do:
a) insert into x
select z from y;
insert into x
select z
The world rejoiced as [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh Berkus) wrote:
Hasnul,
My question is if there is a query design that would query multiple
server simultaneously.. would that improve the performance?
Not without a vast amounts of infrastructure coding. You're
basically talking about what
The perhaps odd thing is that just about any alternative to quad-Xeon
is likely to be _way_ better. There are some context switching
problems that lead to it being remarkably poorer than you'd expect.
Throw in less-than ideal performance of the PAE memory addressing
system and it seems oddly
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everyone!
Since our current Postgres server, a quad Xeon system, finally can't
keep up with our load anymore we're ready to take the next step.
So the question is: Has anyone experiences with running Postgres on
systems with more
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grupos) wrote:
Hi !
I need to insert 500.000 records on a table frequently. It´s a bulk
insertion from my applicatoin.
I am with a very poor performance. PostgreSQL insert very fast until
the tuple 200.000 and after it the insertion starts to
Clinging to sanity, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pailloncy Jean-Gérard) mumbled into her
beard:
I see this article about DB2
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/db2/library/techarticle/dm
-0411rielau/?ca=dgr-lnxw06SQL-Speed
The listing 2 example:
1 SELECT D_TAX, D_NEXT_O_ID
2 INTO :dist_tax ,
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Casey Allen
Shobe) wrote:
I posted about this a couple days ago on dspam-dev...
I am using DSpam with PostgreSQL, and like you discovered the horrible
performance. The reason is because the default PostgreSQL query planner
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Antony Paul), an earthling,
wrote:
Hi all,
I have a table which have more than 20 records. I need to get
the records which matches like this
where today::date = '2004-11-05';
This is the only condition in the query. There is a
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Markus
Schaber) transmitted:
We should create a list of those needs, and then communicate those
to the kernel/fs developers. Then we (as well as other apps) can
make use of those features where they are available, and use
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Riggs), an earthling,
wrote:
On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 15:47, Chris Browne wrote:
Another thing that would be valuable would be to have some way to say:
Read this data; don't bother throwing other data out of the cache
to stuff
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Riggs):
I say this: ARC in 8.0 PostgreSQL allows us to sensibly allocate as
large a shared_buffers cache as is required by the database
workload, and this should not be constrained to a small percentage
of server RAM.
I don't think that this particularly follows
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, [EMAIL PROTECTED] transmitted:
I am doing a comparison between MySQL and PostgreSQL.
In the MySQL manual it says that MySQL performs best with Linux 2.4 with
ReiserFS on x86. Can anyone official, or in the know, give similar
information
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Taylor) wrote:
On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 13:38, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 09:47:36AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
As long as you're on x86, scaling outward is the way to go. If
you want to continue to scale upwards, ask Andrew Sullivan about
his
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh Berkus) wrote:
I've been trying to peg the sweet spot for shared memory using
OSDL's equipment. With Jan's new ARC patch, I was expecting that
the desired amount of shared_buffers to be greatly increased. This
has not turned out to be the case.
That doesn't surprise
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Conway) wrote:
That's exactly what we're doing, but using inherited tables instead of
a union view. With inheritance, there is no need to rebuild the view
each time a table is added or removed. Basically, in our application,
tables are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Riggs) wrote:
The main point is that the constant placed in front of each table
must in some way relate to the data, to make it useful in
querying. If it is just a unique constant, chosen at random, it
won't do much for partition elimination.
It just struck me - this
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Cotner) wrote:
Agreed, I did some preliminary testing today and am very impressed.
I wasn't used to running analyze after a data load, but once I did
that everything was snappy.
Something worth observing is that this is true
The world rejoiced as [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Merlin Moncure) wrote:
Ok, you were right. I made some tests and NTFS is just not very
good in the general case. I've seen some benchmarks for Reiser4
that are just amazing.
Reiser4 has been sounding real interesting.
The killer problem is thus:
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joshua D. Drake) would
write:
I hope you understand that I, in no way have ever suggested
(purposely) anything negative about Slony. Only that I believe they
serve different technical solutions.
Stipulating that I may have some bias
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rudi
Starcevic) transmitted:
A minute for your thoughts and/or suggestions would be great.
Could you give a more concrete example? E.g. - the DDL for the
table(s), most particularly.
At first guess, I think you're
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephane Tessier), an
earthling, wrote:
I think with your help guys I'll do it!
I'm working on it!
I'll work on theses issues:
we have space for more ram(we use 2 gigs on possibility of 3 gigs)
That _may_ help; not completely clear.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Patrick Hatcher) wrote:
Answered my own question. I gave up the vacuum full after 150 mins. I was
able to export to a file, vacuum full the empty table, and reimport in less
than 10 mins. I suspect the empty item pointers and the
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jan Wieck) wrote:
On 7/9/2004 10:16 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
What is it about the buffer cache that makes it so unhappy being
able to hold everything? I don't want to be seen as a cache hit
fascist, but isn't it just better if the
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed L.), an earthling, wrote:
On Monday February 23 2004 10:23, Tom Lane wrote:
Ed L. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Depending on the size of mytable, you might need an ANALYZE doomed
in there, but I'm suspecting not. A quick experiment
Clinging to sanity, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Harris) mumbled into her beard:
I will soon have at my disposal a new IBM pSeries server. The main
mission for this box will be to serve several pg databases. I have
ordered 8GB of RAM and want to learn the best way to tune pg and AIX
for this
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane)
transmitted:
ObQuote: Research is what I am doing when I don't know what I am
doing. - attributed to Werner von Braun, but has anyone got a
definitive reference?
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Nolan) wrote:
We have a web app with a postgres backend. Most queries have subsecond
response times through the web even with high usage. Every once in awhile
someone will run either an ad-hoc query or some other long
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
greetings!
on a dedicated pgsql server is putting pg_xlog
in drive as OS almost equivalent to putting on a seperate
drive?
in both case the actual data files are in a seperate
drive.
Well, if the OS drive is relatively inactive, then
Oops! [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pavel Stehule) was seen spray-painting on a wall:
Regards
Pavel Stehule
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, David Teran wrote:
Hi
we have a table with about 4 million rows. One column has an int value,
there is a btree index on it. We tried to execute the following
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Carlos
Eduardo Smanioto) transmitted:
I did some heavy-transaction-oriented tests recently on somewhat
heftier quad-Xeon hardware, and found little difference between 2.4
and 2.6, and a small-but-quite-repeatable
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Carpenter) writes:
I am doing a massive database conversion from MySQL to Postgresql for a
company I am working for. This has a few quirks to it that I haven't
been able to nail down the answers I need from reading and searching
through previous list info.
For
on I/O-bound processing.
--
output = reverse(ofni.smrytrebil @ enworbbc)
http://dev6.int.libertyrms.com/
Christopher Browne
(416) 646 3304 x124 (land)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
Clinging to sanity, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jón Ragnarsson) mumbled into her beard:
I am writing a website that will probably have some traffic.
Right now I wrap every .php page in pg_connect() and pg_close().
Then I read somewhere that Postgres only supports 100 simultaneous
connections (default).
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Rawnsley) would
write:
I would like, of course, for it to use the index, given that it
takes 20-25% of the time. Fiddling with CPU_TUPLE_COST doesn't do
anything until I exceed 0.5, which strikes me as a bit high (though
please
/
Christopher Browne
(416) 646 3304 x124 (land)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Siracusa), an earthling,
wrote:
On 1/5/04 1:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
John Siracusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Obviously the planner is making some bad choices here.
A fair conclusion ...
I know that it is trying to avoid random
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Siracusa) wrote:
What column(s) should I increase? Do I have to do anything after increasing
the statistics, or do I just wait for the stats collector to do its thing?
You have to ANALYZE the table again, to force in new statistics.
And if
Oops! [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Siracusa) was seen spray-painting on a wall:
Speaking of special cases (well, I was on the admin list) there are two
kinds that would really benefit from some attention.
1. The query select max(foo) from bar where the column foo has an
index. Aren't indexes
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Tuckfield) wrote:
Not that I'm offering to do the porgramming mind you, :) but . .
In the case of select count(*), one optimization is to do a scan of the
primary key, not the table itself, if the table has a primary key. In
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Taylor) wrote:
Especially with very large tables, hearing the disks grind as Postgres scans
every single row in order to determine the number of rows in a table or the
max value of a column (even a primary key created from a sequence) is pretty
painful. If the
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (D. Dante Lorenso), an
earthling, wrote:
I've been debating with a collegue who argues that indexing a
boolean column is a BAD idea and that is will actually slow
down queries.
No, it would be expected to slow down inserts, but not likely
in String.concat @ [name;tld];;
http://dev6.int.libertyrms.com/
Christopher Browne
(416) 646 3304 x124 (land)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Cramer) wrote:
It appears that the optimizer only uses indexes for = clause?
It can use indices only if there is a given prefix.
Thus:
where text_field like 'A%'
can use the index, essentially transforming this into the clauses
where text_field = 'A' and
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (sandra ruiz):
I need to know if there is anything like hints of Oracle in
Postgres..otherwise..I wish to find a way to force a query plan to use
the indexes or tell the optimizer things like optimize based in
statistics, I want to define the order of the a join ,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry for my mistake on the 15000 recs per day.
It was useful for us to pick at that a bit; it was certainly looking a
mite suspicious.
In fact, this server is planned as a OLTP database server for a retailer.
Our intention is either to setup 1 or 2 Postgresql db in
After takin a swig o' Arrakan spice grog, [EMAIL PROTECTED] belched out:
We would be recommending to our ct. on the use of Postgresql db as
compared to MS SQL Server. We are targetting to use Redhat Linux ES
v2.1, Postgresql v7.3.4 and Postgresql ODBC 07.03.0100.
We would like to know the
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh Berkus), an earthling,
wrote:
As long as pg_autovacuum remains a contrib module, I don't think
any changes to the system catelogs will be make. If pg_autovacuum
is deemed ready to move out of contrib, then we can talk about the
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rajesh Kumar Mallah)
wrote:
INFO: profiles: found 0 removable, 369195 nonremovable row versions in 43423 pages
DETAIL: 246130 dead row versions cannot be removed yet.
Nonremovable row versions range from 136 to 2036 bytes long.
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hannu Krosing), an earthling,
wrote:
Christopher Browne kirjutas R, 14.11.2003 kell 16:13:
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rajesh Kumar Mallah)
wrote:
INFO: profiles: found 0 removable, 369195
After a long battle with technology,[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rajesh Kumar Mallah), an
earthling, wrote:
the error mentioned in first email has been overcome
by running osdb on the same machine hosting the DB server.
Yes, it seems unrealistic to try to run the client on a separate
host from the
://dev6.int.libertyrms.com/
Christopher Browne
(416) 646 3304 x124 (land)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rajesh Kumar Mallah) wrote:
Can you please have a Look at the below and suggest why it
apparently puts 7.3.4 on an infinite loop . the CPU utilisation of
the backend running it approches 99%.
What would be useful, for this case, would be to provide the query
plan, perhaps
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
