Dear All
Looking at the processes running on our server, it appears that each time
a web server program makes a call to the database server, we start a new
process on the database server which obviously has a start up cost. In
Apache, for example, you can say at start up time,that you want the
mac
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 13:35, Hilary Forbes wrote:
> [snip] Is there a way that we can achieve this in Postgres? We have a
> situation whereby we have lots of web based users doing short quick
> queries and obviously the start up time for a process must add to
> their perceived response time.
Yes:
On 11/8/06, Spiegelberg, Greg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Merlin,
I'm kinda shocked you had such a bad exp. with the AMS200. We have a
unit here hooked up to a 4-node Linux cluster with 4 databases banging
on it and we get good, consistent perfomance out of it. All 4 nodes can
throw 25 to 75 MB
Yes. This is connection pooling. You can find a lot of examples from
the internet on connection pooling, rather source codes. Also keep in
mind that connection pools can be maintained on the application as
well as the database server side. Check which one suits you.
--Imad
www.EnterpriseDB.com
Csaba Nagy wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 13:35, Hilary Forbes wrote:
[snip] Is there a way that we can achieve this in Postgres? We have a
situation whereby we have lots of web based users doing short quick
queries and obviously the start up time for a process must add to
their perceived response
On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 12:39 +1030, Shane Ambler wrote:
> Csaba Nagy wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 13:35, Hilary Forbes wrote:
> >> [snip] Is there a way that we can achieve this in Postgres? We have a
> >> situation whereby we have lots of web based users doing short quick
> >> queries and obvio
I'm executing the following query:
select
hf.mailbox,hf.uid,hf.position,hf.part,hf.field,hf.value,
af.address,a.name,a.localpart,a.domain
from
header_fields hf
left join address_fields af
using ( mailbox, uid, position, part, field )
left
Abhijit Menon-Sen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The header_fields table contains 13.5M rows, of which only ~250K match
> the where condition. I created an index like this:
> create index hffpv on header_fields(field)
> where field<=12 and (part!='' or value ilike '%,%')
> Note the 2M estim
At 2006-11-10 01:15:24 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> it seems that "field<=12" is true for a much smaller fraction of the
> rows satisfying (part!='' or value ilike '%,%') than for the general
> population of rows in the header_fields table.
Indeed. One-sixth of the rows in the entire table
