Here's the explain:
pg=# explain select getMemberAdminPrevious_sp(247815829,
1,'test.em...@hotmail.com', 'Email', 'Test');
QUERY PLAN
--
Result (cost=0.00..0.26 rows=1 width=0)
(1 row)
Time: 1.167 ms
There was discussion
ecute the function?
On Tue, 2012-01-24 at 21:47 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hello
>
> 2012/1/24 Tony Capobianco :
> > We are migrating our Oracle warehouse to Postgres 9.
> >
> > This function responds well:
> >
> > pg=# select public.getMemberAdminPrevio
We are migrating our Oracle warehouse to Postgres 9.
This function responds well:
pg=# select public.getMemberAdminPrevious_sp2(247815829,
1,'test.em...@hotmail.com', 'email', 'test');
getmemberadminprevious_sp2
(1 row)
Time: 7.549 ms
However, when testing, thi
Oooo...some bad math there. Thanks.
On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 12:38 -0700, Samuel Gendler wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Tony Capobianco
> wrote:
> My current setting is 22G. According to some documentation, I
> want to
> set effectiv
? Most of our other etl processes are running fine,
however I'm curious if I could see a significant performance boost by
reducing the effective_cache_size.
On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 13:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tony Capobianco writes:
> > Well, this ran much better. However, I'
wrote:
> Hello
>
> what is your settings for
>
> random_page_cost, seq_page_cost and work_mem?
>
> Regards
>
> Pavel Stehule
>
> 2011/6/8 Tony Capobianco :
> > Here's the explain analyze:
> >
> > pg_dw=# explain analyze CREATE
> Seq Scan on ecr_sents s (cost=0.00..8.79 rows=479
width=4) (actual time=0.010..0.121 rows=479 loops=1)
Total runtime: 167279.950 ms
On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 11:51 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Tony Capobianco (tcapobia...@prospectiv.com) wrote:
> > HashAggregate (cost=43911
Here's the explain analyze:
pg_dw=# explain analyze CREATE TABLE ecr_opens with (FILLFACTOR=100)
as
select o.emailcampaignid, count(memberid) opencnt
from openactivity o,ecr_sents s
where s.emailcampaignid = o.emailcampaignid
group by o.emailcampaignid;
QUERY
PLAN
.79 rows=479
width=4)
Yikes. Two sequential scans.
On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 11:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tony Capobianco writes:
> > pg_dw=# explain CREATE TABLE ecr_opens with (FILLFACTOR=100)
> > pg_dw-# as
> > pg_dw-# select o.emailcampaignid, count(memberid) opencnt
We are thiis close to moving our datawarehouse from Oracle to
Postgres. This query is identical on both systems, but runs much, much
faster on Oracle. Our Postgres host has far superior hardware and
tuning parameters have been set via pgtune. Most everything else runs
faster in Postgres, exc
Very true Igor! Free is my favorite price.
I'll figure a way around this issue.
Thanks for your help.
Tony
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 14:54 -0400, Igor Neyman wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Tony Capobianco [mailto:tcapobia...@prospectiv.com]
> > Sent: Fri
identified by operation id):
---
4 - filter("EMAILBOUNCED"=0 AND "EMAILOK"=1)
16 rows selected.
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 13:43 -0400, Igor Neyman wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Tony Capobian
The recommendations on the numeric columns are fantastic. Thank you
very much. We will revisit our methods of assigning datatypes when we
migrate our data over from Oracle.
Regarding the full table scans; it appears inevitable that full table
scans are necessary for the volume of data involved an
We are in the process of testing migration of our oracle data warehouse
over to postgres. A potential showstopper are full table scans on our
members table. We can't function on postgres effectively unless index
scans are employed. I'm thinking I don't have something set correctly
in my postgres
14 matches
Mail list logo
