On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 5:39 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Marc Slemko ma...@znep.com writes:
I ran into this oddity lately that goes against everything I thought I
understood and was wondering if anyone had any insight.
SELECT * avoids a projection step ... see
Dear Pg people,
I would ask for your help considering this scaling issue. We are planning to
move from 3Millions of events/day instance of postgres (8 CPU, 65 gb ram) to 5
millions of items/day.
What do you suggest in order to plan this switch? Add separate server? Increase
RAM? Use SSD?
Any
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 10:55:04AM +0200, Roberto Grandi wrote:
Dear Pg people,
I would ask for your help considering this scaling issue. We are planning to
move from 3Millions of events/day instance of postgres (8 CPU, 65 gb ram) to
5 millions of items/day.
What do you suggest in order
Dear All
thanks for your precious help. I'll come back to the list once analyzed our
system.
Roberto
- Messaggio originale -
Da: k...@rice.edu
A: Roberto Grandi roberto.gra...@trovaprezzi.it
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Inviato: Venerdì, 3 ottobre 2014 15:00:03
Oggetto: Re:
Hi Roberto,
Hardware etc. is a solution; but you have not yet characterised the problem.
You should investigate if the events are mostly...
- reads
- writes
- computationally intensive
- memory intensive
- I/O intensive
- network I/O intensive
- independent? (e.g. does it matter if you
On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Roberto Grandi
roberto.gra...@trovaprezzi.it wrote:
Dear Pg people,
I would ask for your help considering this scaling issue. We are planning to
move from 3Millions of events/day instance of postgres (8 CPU, 65 gb ram) to
5 millions of items/day.
The most
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
On 10/02/2014 02:30 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Having read papers on it, I believe the problem is intractable. Coding
is not the issue. To anyone:
On 3.10.2014 21:58, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com
mailto:j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Yes, it's only intractable if you're wedded to the idea of a tiny,
fixed-size sample. If we're allowed to sample, say, 1% of the table, we
can
On 3.10.2014 02:54, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Yes, it's only intractable if you're wedded to the idea of a tiny,
fixed-size sample. If we're allowed to sample, say, 1% of the
table, we can get a MUCH more accurate n_distinct
