ays add it themselves to achieve what I was doing in the explicit query.
I appreciate your time.
-Reece
--
Reece Hart, http://www.in-machina.com/~reece/, GPG:0x25EC91A0
I have a large query which I would like to place in a view. The explicit query is sufficiently fast, but the same query as a view is much slower and uses a different plan. I would appreciate an explanation of why this is, and, more importantly whether/how I might coax the view to use a differen
tional indexes would apply only to immutable fx only, but that's fine.)
Thanks,
Reece
--
Reece Hart, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.gene.com/
Genentech, Inc. 650/225-6133 (voice), -5389 (fax)
Bioinformatics and Protein Engineering
1 DNA Way,
emphasizes that journals probably work best with short burst writes and syncing during lulls rather than sustained writes.
I ended up solving the update issue without really updating, so ext2 timings aren't known. So, you may want to test this yourself if you're concerned.
-Reece
--
Ree
1161854174633
p2thread_pmodel_id | 123243 | 1009606656 | 0.0430003860830331
paprospect2_redundant_alignment | 229934 | 1883619328 | 0.0230479032332376
What do you make of 'em apples?
Thanks,
Reece
--
Reece Hart, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED
ly done...
Thanks,
Reece
--
Reece Hart, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.gene.com/
Genentech, Inc. 650/225-6133 (voice), -5389 (fax)
Bioinformatics and Protein Engineering
1 DNA Way, MS-93http://www.in-machina.com/~reece/
South
a supertable with the same name as an extant column in a subtable, it appears that such "merged definition" columns do not have the same properties as a typical inherited column. In particular, dropping the column from the supertable does not drop it from the subta
