On 19 September 2014 13:51, Björn Wittich bjoern_witt...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi mailing list,
I am relatively new to postgres. I have a table with 500 coulmns and about
40 mio rows. I call this cache table where one column is a unique key
(indexed) and the 499 columns (type integer) are some
On 18 March 2014 22:26, Yu Zhao yzha...@gmail.com wrote:
In PostgreSQL 9.3.3 Documentation 11.8. Partial Indexes Example 11-2
(http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/interactive/indexes-partial.html),
the partial index is created
CREATE INDEX orders_unbilled_index ON orders (order_nr) WHERE
On 2 June 2013 21:39, Robert DiFalco robert.difa...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a table called contacts. It has a BIGINT owner_id which references
a record in the user table. It also has a BIGINT user_id which may be null.
Additionally it has a BOOLEAN blocked column to indicate if a contact is
On 1 March 2012 13:02, Marcin Mirosław mar...@mejor.pl wrote:
W dniu 01.03.2012 12:50, Szymon Guz pisze:
Hi Szymon,
If you have only 2 rows in the table, then the plan really doesn't
matter too much. Sorting two rows would be really fast :)
Try to check it with 10k rows.
It doesn't
On 11 October 2011 19:52, CS DBA cs_...@consistentstate.com wrote:
Hi all ;
I'm trying to tune a difficult query.
I have 2 tables:
cust_acct (9million rows)
cust_orders (200,000 rows)
Here's the query:
SELECT
a.account_id, a.customer_id, a.order_id, a.primary_contact_id,
On 11 October 2011 21:08, Radhya sahal rad_cs_2...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi
I want to know how can i measure runtime query in postgresql if i use
command line psql?
not explain rutime for the query such as the runtime which appear in
pgadmin ?
such as Total query runtime: 203 ms.
run this in
On 11 October 2011 21:13, Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11 October 2011 21:08, Radhya sahal rad_cs_2...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi
I want to know how can i measure runtime query in postgresql if i use
command line psql?
not explain rutime for the query such as the runtime which appear
On 2 August 2011 08:42, Adarsh Sharma adarsh.sha...@orkash.com wrote:
Dear all,
Just want to know which join is better for querying data faster.
I have 2 tables A ( 70 GB ) B ( 7 MB )
A has 10 columns B has 3 columns.Indexes exist on both tables's ids.
select p.* from table A p, B q
On 5 April 2011 21:25, Maria L. Wilson maria.l.wilso...@nasa.gov wrote:
Would really appreciate someone taking a look at the query below
Thanks in advance!
this is on a linux box...
Linux dsrvr201.larc.nasa.gov 2.6.18-164.9.1.el5 #1 SMP Wed Dec 9 03:27:37
EST 2009 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64
On 5 November 2010 11:59, A B gentosa...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi there.
If you just wanted PostgreSQL to go as fast as possible WITHOUT any
care for your data (you accept 100% dataloss and datacorruption if any
error should occur), what settings should you use then?
I'm just curious, what do
On 26 October 2010 12:56, AI Rumman rumman...@gmail.com wrote:
Which one is faster?
select count(*) from talble
or
select count(id) from table
where id is the primary key.
Check the query plan, both queries are the same.
regards
Szymon
2010/10/26 Marcin Mirosław mar...@mejor.pl
W dniu 26.10.2010 12:59, Szymon Guz pisze:
both queries are the same.
IMHO they aren't the same, but they returns the same value in this case.
I mean count(field) doesn't count NULL values, count(*) does it.
I'm writing this only for note
2010/10/26 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz gryz...@gmail.com
implementation wise, count(*) is faster. Very easy to test:
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM generate_series(1,100) a, generate_series(1,1000) b;
SELECT COUNT(a) FROM generate_series(1,100) a, generate_series(1,1000) b;
;]
Well, strange. Why is that
2010/10/26 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz gryz...@gmail.com
2010/10/26 Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com:
Well, strange. Why is that slower?
To answer that fully, you would need to see the implementation.
suffice to say,
count(a) does:
if (a NULL)
{
count++;
}
and count(*) does:
count
, but the
result is that the database knows, that it would be faster not to use index,
if the number of returning rows is big.
regards
Szymon Guz
Szymon Guz
table pg_locks for locking issues, maybe the query is just slow but
not hangs.
Notice that the query just returns 2M rows, that can be quite huge number
due to your database structure, data amount and current server
configuration.
regards
Szymon Guz
2010/6/10 AI Rumman rumman...@gmail.com
I found only AccessShareLock in pg_locks during the query.
And the query does not return data though I have been waiting for 10 mins.
Do you have any idea ?
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/6/10 AI Rumman
recent data. I have an index on the row creation
date and I would like almost all of my queries to have a query plan looking
something like:
[CUT]
Do you have autovacuum running? Have you tried updating statistics?
regards
Szymon Guz
automatically.
No, explain doesn't update table's statistics.
regards
Szymon Guz
that there are 2400 rows in this table. Probably you've
deleted some rows from the table leaving just one.
regards
Szymon Guz
21 matches
Mail list logo
