>Hi,
>
>We are experiencing slow performance on 8 Beta 2 Dev3 on Win32 and are
>trying to determine why. Any info is appreciated.
>
>We have a Web Server and a DB server both running Win2KServer with all
>service packs and critical updates.
>
>An ASP page on the Web Server hits the DB Server with a
Hi all,
I recently migrated my database from schema
'public' to multiple schema.
I have around 100 tables, and divided them in
14 different schemas, and then adapted my application to use schemas as
well.
I could percept that the query / insert /
update times get pretty much faster then wh
Igor,
I'm not sure if it is proper to state that schemas are themselves speeding things up.
As an example, we have data that is usually accessed by county; when we put all of the
data into one big table and select from it using a code for a county of interest, the
process is fairly slow as ther
Bill,
In order to manifest the context switch problem you will definitely
require clients to be set to more than one in pgbench. It only occurs
when 2 or more backends need access to shared memory.
If you want help backpatching Gavin's patch I'll be glad to do it for
you, but you do need a recent
Tom Lane wrote:
> Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> mmap() is Right Out because it does not afford us sufficient control
> >> over when changes to the in-memory data will propagate to disk.
>
> > ... that's especially true if we simply cannot
> > have the page writte
Hi all,
I'm trying to find smarter ways to dig data from
my database, and have the following scenario:
table1
-- id
-- name
.
.
.
.
.
.
table2
-- id
-- number
.
.
.
.
.
.
I want to create a view to give me back just
what I want:
The id, the name and the number.
I tought in doing the fo
First off, I'd like to get involved with these tests - pressure of other
work only has prevented me.
Here's my take on the results so far:
I think taking the ratio of the memory allocated to shared_buffers against
the total memory available on the server is completely fallacious. That is
why the
Simon,
> If you draw a graph of speedup (y) against cache size as a
> % of total database size, the graph looks like an upside-down "L" - i.e.
> the graph rises steeply as you give it more memory, then turns sharply at a
> particular point, after which it flattens out. The "turning point" is th
On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 16:57 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Simon,
>
>
>
> > If you draw a graph of speedup (y) against cache size as a
> > % of total database size, the graph looks like an upside-down "L" - i.e.
> > the graph rises steeply as you give it more memory, then turns sharply at a
> > pa
pg to my mind is unique in not trying to avoid OS buffering. Other
dbmses spend a substantial effort to create a virtual OS (task
management, I/O drivers, etc.) both in code and support. Choosing mmap
seems such a limiting an option - it adds OS dependency and limits
kernel developer options (2G li
On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 04:38, Igor Maciel Macaubas wrote:
> I have around 100 tables, and divided them in 14 different schemas,
> and then adapted my application to use schemas as well.
> I could percept that the query / insert / update times get pretty much
> faster then when I was using the old un
Aaron Werman wrote:
> pg to my mind is unique in not trying to avoid OS buffering. Other
> dbmses spend a substantial effort to create a virtual OS (task
> management, I/O drivers, etc.) both in code and support. Choosing mmap
> seems such a limiting an option - it adds OS dependency and limits
> k
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Simon Riggs"):
> I say this: ARC in 8.0 PostgreSQL allows us to sensibly allocate as
> large a shared_buffers cache as is required by the database
> workload, and this should not be constrained to a small percentage
> of server RAM.
I don't think that this particularly fo
Hi Igor,
I expect that when you moved your tables
to different schemas that you effectively did a physical re-organization (ie
unload/reload of the tables). It's nothing to do with the use of
schemas as such. If you had reloaded your tables into the same system
schema you would have experi
Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm...something just occurred to me about this.
> Would a hybrid approach be possible? That is, use mmap() to handle
> reads, and use write() to handle writes?
Nope. Have you read the specs regarding mmap-vs-stdio synchronization?
Basically it says that
15 matches
Mail list logo
