Re: [PERFORM] Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze

2003-10-21 Thread Tom Lane
Harry Broomhall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >-> Index Scan using import_cdrs_cdr_id_key on import_cdrs (cost=0.00..52.00 > rows=1000 width=164) (actual time=0.42..11479.51 rows=335671 loops=1) >-> Seq Scan on import_cdrs (cost=0.00..8496.71 rows=335671 width=126) (actual > time=0.15

Re: [PERFORM] Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze

2003-10-21 Thread Harry Broomhall
Shridhar Daithankar writes: First - many thanks for your suggestions and pointers to further info. I have been trying some of them with some interesting results! > Harry Broomhall wrote: > > #effective_cache_size = 1000# typically 8KB each > > #random_page_cost = 4 # units are on

Re: [PERFORM] Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze

2003-10-21 Thread Harry Broomhall
Shridhar Daithankar writes: > Harry Broomhall wrote: > > #effective_cache_size = 1000# typically 8KB each > > #random_page_cost = 4 # units are one sequential page fetch cost > > You must tune the first one at least. Try > http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/Tidbits/perf.html t

Re: [PERFORM] Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze

2003-10-21 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Harry Broomhall wrote: > #effective_cache_size = 1000# typically 8KB each > #random_page_cost = 4 # units are one sequential page fetch cost You must tune the first one at least. Try http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/Tidbits/perf.html to tune these parameters. >>2) The EXPLAIN

Re: [PERFORM] Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze

2003-10-21 Thread Harry Broomhall
Josh Berkus writes: > Harry, Many thanks for your response, > > >It has been suggested to me that I resubmit this question to this list, > > rather than the GENERAL list it was originaly sent to. > > > >I asked earlier about ways of doing an UPDATE involving a left outer > > join and

Re: [PERFORM] Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze

2003-10-20 Thread Josh Berkus
Harry, >It has been suggested to me that I resubmit this question to this list, > rather than the GENERAL list it was originaly sent to. > >I asked earlier about ways of doing an UPDATE involving a left outer > join and got some very useful feedback. The query you posted will always be so

[PERFORM] Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze

2003-10-20 Thread Harry Broomhall
It has been suggested to me that I resubmit this question to this list, rather than the GENERAL list it was originaly sent to. I asked earlier about ways of doing an UPDATE involving a left outer join and got some very useful feedback. This has thrown up a (to me) strange anomaly about t