Vivek,
On 7/31/06 2:04 PM, Vivek Khera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, but it *does* matter how fast said processor can sling the memory
around, and in my experience, the opterons have been much better at
that due to the efficiency of the memory transport layer.
My Mac laptop with a Core 1 and
* Arjen van der Meijden:
For a database system, however, processors hardly ever are the main
bottleneck, are they?
Not directly, but the choice of processor influences which
chipsets/mainboards are available, which in turn has some impact on
the number of RAM slots. (According to our hardware
Guoping Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In fact, it is a general question that Is it a good practice we shall avoid
to run application server and database server on the platform with opposite
edian? or it simply doesn't matter?
Our network protocol uses big-endian consistently, so there will
Hello, I have a query:
explain analyze select tu.url_id, tu.url, coalesce(sd.recurse, 100), case when
COALESCE(get_option('use_banner')::integer,0) = 0 then 0 else ts.use_banner
end as use_banner, ts.use_cookies, ts.use_robots, ts.includes, ts.excludes,
ts.track_domain,
Actually, what we did in the tests at EnterpriseDB was encapsulate each
SQL statement within its own BEGIN/EXCEPTION/END block.
Using this approach, if a SQL statement aborts, the rollback is
confined
to the BEGIN/END block that encloses it. Other SQL statements would
not be affected since the
I am looking for some general guidelines on what is the performance
overhead of enabling point-in-time recovery (archive_command config) on
an 8.1 database. Obviously it will depend on a multitude of factors, but
some broad-brush statements and/or anecdotal evidence will suffice.
Should one worry
In response to George Pavlov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I am looking for some general guidelines on what is the performance
overhead of enabling point-in-time recovery (archive_command config) on
an 8.1 database. Obviously it will depend on a multitude of factors, but
some broad-brush statements
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 08:43:49AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Jochem van Dieten wrote:
Tweakers.net has done a database performance test between a Sun T2000 (8
core T1) and a Sun X4200 (2 dual core Opteron 280). The database
benchmark is developed inhouse and represents the average query
On 1-8-2006 19:26, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 08:43:49AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I'd love to get an english translation that we could use for PR.
Actually, we have an english version of the Socket F follow-up.
http://tweakers.net/reviews/638 which basically displays
I need some expert advice on how to optimize a translation query (this word choice will become clear shortly, I hope).
Say I have aHUMONGOUS table of foreign language translations (call it TRANS) with records like these:
meaning_id: 1
language_id: 5
translation: jidoosha
meaning_id: 1
On 1 aug 2006, at 20.09, tlm wrote:
SELECT q3.translation, q2.otherstuff
FROM
(
SELECT INPUT.word, q1.meaning_id, INPUT.otherstuff
FROM
INPUT
INNER JOIN
(
SELECT translation, meaning_id
FROM TRANS
WHERE translation IN (SELECT word FROM INPUT)
) AS q1
ON INPUT.word =
I intend to test Postgres/Bizgres for DWH use. I want to use XFS filesystem to
get the best possible performance at FS
level(correct me if I am wrong !).
Is anyone using XFS for storing/retrieving relatively large amount of data (~
200GB)?
If yes, what about the performance and stability of
Sorry, forgot to ask:
What is the recommended/best PG block size for DWH database? 16k, 32k, 64k ?
What hsould be the relation between XFS/RAID stripe size and PG block size ?
Best Regards.
Milen Kulev
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for your prompt reply.
Are you using some special XFS options ?
I mean special values for logbuffers bufferiosize , extent size preallocations
etc ?
I will have only 6 big tables and about 20 other relatively small (fact
aggregation) tables (~ 10-20 GB each).
I believe
Not sure if this helps solve the problem but... (see below) As new records are added Indexes are used for awhile and then at some point postgres switches to seq scan. It is repeatable. Any suggestions/comments to try and solve this are welcome. Thanks Data is as follows:
On Aug 1, 2006, at 2:49 PM, Milen Kulev wrote:
Is anyone using XFS for storing/retrieving relatively large amount
of data (~ 200GB)?
Yes, we've been using it on Linux since v2.4 (currently v2.6) and it
has been rock solid on our database servers (Opterons, running in
both 32-bit and
J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
On Aug 1, 2006, at 2:49 PM, Milen Kulev wrote:
Is anyone using XFS for storing/retrieving relatively large amount
of data (~ 200GB)?
Yes, we've been using it on Linux since v2.4 (currently v2.6) and it
has been rock solid on our database servers (Opterons,
On 8/1/06, George Pavlov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am looking for some general guidelines on what is the performance
overhead of enabling point-in-time recovery (archive_command config) on
an 8.1 database. Obviously it will depend on a multitude of factors, but
some broad-brush statements
Milen Kulev wrote:
Is anyone using XFS for storing/retrieving relatively large amount of data (~
200GB)?
Yes, but not for that large - only about 40-50 GB of database data.
If yes, what about the performance and stability of XFS.
I'm pretty happy with the performance, particularly
Milen,
On 8/1/06 3:19 PM, Milen Kulev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, forgot to ask:
What is the recommended/best PG block size for DWH database? 16k, 32k, 64k
?
What hsould be the relation between XFS/RAID stripe size and PG block size ?
We have found that the page size in PG starts to
Eugeny N Dzhurinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[slow query]
The bulk of your time seems to be going into this indexscan:
- Index Scan using
task_scheduler_icustomer_id on task_scheduler ts (cost=2.03..11.51 rows=1
width=51) (actual time=2.785..2.785 rows=0
21 matches
Mail list logo
