Hello, I wanted to ask according such a problem which we had faced with.
We are widely using postgres arrays like key->value array by doing like
this:
{{1,5},{2,6},{3,7}}
where 1,2,3 are keys, and 5,6,7 are values. In our pgSql functions we
are using self written array_input(array::numeric[],
Hello
do you know FOREACH IN ARRAY statement in 9.1
this significantly accelerate iteration over array
http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2011/03/07/waiting-for-9-1-foreach-in-array/
2011/12/13 Aleksej Trofimov :
> Hello, I wanted to ask according such a problem which we had faced with.
> We are
We have tried foreach syntax, but we have noticed performance degradation:
Function with for: 203ms
Function with foreach: ~250ms:
there is functions code:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION input_value_fe(in_inputs numeric[],
in_input_nr numeric)
RETURNS numeric AS
$BODY$
declare i numeric[];
BEGIN
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Jon Nelson wrote:
>> I was experimenting with a few different methods of taking a line of
>> text, parsing it, into a set of fields, and then getting that info
>> into a table.
>>
>> The first method involv
Hello
2011/12/13 Aleksej Trofimov :
> We have tried foreach syntax, but we have noticed performance degradation:
> Function with for: 203ms
> Function with foreach: ~250ms:
>
> there is functions code:
> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION input_value_fe(in_inputs numeric[], in_input_nr
> numeric)
> RETUR
I've got a 5GB table with about 12 million rows.
Recently, I had to select the distinct values from just one column.
The planner chose an index scan. The query took almost an hour.
When I forced index scan off, the query took 90 seconds (full table scan).
The planner estimated 70,000 unique values
Jon Nelson writes:
> I've got a 5GB table with about 12 million rows.
> Recently, I had to select the distinct values from just one column.
> The planner chose an index scan. The query took almost an hour.
> When I forced index scan off, the query took 90 seconds (full table scan).
Usually, we he
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jon Nelson writes:
>> I've got a 5GB table with about 12 million rows.
>> Recently, I had to select the distinct values from just one column.
>> The planner chose an index scan. The query took almost an hour.
>> When I forced index scan off, the
On 10/12/11 04:30, Tom Lane wrote:
However, it's not apparent to me why you would see any difference
between 8.2 and 8.4 on this type of query. I tried a query analogous
to this one on both, and got identical plans. I'm guessing that your
slowdown is due to not having updated statistics on the
Jon Nelson writes:
> The only thing I have left are these statements:
> get_call_result_type
> TupleDescGetAttInMetadata
> BuildTupleFromCStrings
> HeapTupleGetDatum
> and finally PG_RETURN_DATUM
> It turns out that:
> get_call_result_type adds 43 seconds [total: 54],
> TupleDescGetAttInMetadata
Hi guys,
A nub question here since I could not figure it out on my own:
I'm using Hamachi to connect different sites into a VPN and their address
always starts with 5.*.*.* - the problem I'm facing is that I cannot make the
access restricted to that particular range only.
Currently I got :
host a
11 matches
Mail list logo
