Re: [PERFORM] autovacuum not working?

> From: Bill Moran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > In response to "Medora Schauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I've recently moved to 8.1 and find that autovacuum doesn't seem to be > > working, at least not the way I expected it to. I need the tuple

[PERFORM] autovacuum not working?

autovacuum has run?   I’m attaching my conf file.   Medora Schauer Fairfield Industries       postgresql.conf Description: postgresql.conf ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate

Re: [PERFORM] hyper slow after upgrade to 8.1.4

> From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 11:12 AM > > Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 08:22:46AM -0500, Medora Schauer wrote: > >> Can it be that the connection delay is because first an

Re: [PERFORM] hyper slow after upgrade to 8.1.4

> From: Bruno Wolff III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 8:54 PM > To: Medora Schauer > Cc: postgresql > Subject: Re: hyper slow after upgrade to 8.1.4 > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 15:41:14 -0500, > Medora Schauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

[PERFORM] hyper slow after upgrade to 8.1.4

running the 8.1.4 postmaster everything was fine.   I know I’m not giving much to go on but I’m stumped.  Can anyone suggest how I might track down the cause of this problem?   Medora Schauer    

Re: [PERFORM] slow select

Thanks for your help, Medora ******* Medora Schauer Sr. Software Engineer Fairfield Industries *** ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have

Re: [PERFORM] slow select

> > Medora, > > > I'm using pg 7.3.4 to do a select involving a join on 2 tables. > > The query is taking 15 secs which seems extreme to me considering > > the indices that exist on the two tables. EXPLAIN ANALYZE shows > > that the indices aren't being used. I've done VACUUM ANALYZE on the

[PERFORM] slow select

12) (actual time=7.55..2440.06 rows=290106 loops=1) Total runtime: 15212.05 msec *** Medora Schauer Sr. Software Engineer Fairfield Industries 14100 Southwest Freeway Suite 600 Sugar Lan

Re: [PERFORM] Odd performance results - more info

> Medora Schauer wrote: > > I would greatly appreciate it if someone could run this > code in their > > environment and let me know if you get results similiar to mine. > > The INT test results in execution times of 11 - 50+ secs increasing > > each time th

[PERFORM] Odd performance results - more info

curiosity. I'd really like to know what is going on here... ******* Medora Schauer Sr. Software Engineer Fairfield Industries Sugar Land, Tx 77478-3469 [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** original email: ***

Re: [PERFORM] Odd performance results - more info

> > > Medora Schauer wrote: > > > I would greatly appreciate it if someone could run this > > code in their > > > environment and let me know if you get results similiar to mine. > > > The INT test results in execution times of 11 - 50+ secs > inc

Re: [PERFORM] Odd performance results

Orignally there were but in the process of trying to figure out what is going on I stripped everything out of the database except the table being queried. > > "Medora Schauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I have a table with a 3 column key. I noticed that when

[PERFORM] Odd performance results

postmaster version is 7.1.3. Any help will be greatly appreciated. ******* Medora Schauer Sr. Software Engineer Fairfield Industries 14100 Southwest Freeway Suite 600 Sugar Land, Tx 77478-3469 USA [EMAIL