Hi again,
/*Hedayat Vatankhah*/ wrote on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 01:20:53 +0330:
Hi,
/*David Rowley*/ wrote on Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:57:04 +1300:
On 31 January 2016 at 01:30, Hedayat Vatankhah
wrote:
Personally, I expect both queries below to perform exactly the same:
SELECT
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> Sent: Freitag, 5. Februar 2016 16:07
> > http://explain.depesz.com/s/wKv7
> > Postgres Version 9.3.10 (Linux)
> >
> > Hello,
> > this is a large daily table that only get bulk inserts (200-400 /days) with
> > no
Hi,
Question:
What may cause a primary key index to suddenly become very slow? Index scan for
single row taking 2-3 seconds. A manual vacuum resolved the problem.
Background:
We have a simple table ‘KONTO’ with about 600k rows.
Column|Type |
Additional information:
The problematic row has likely received many hot updates (100k+). Could this be
a likely explanation for the high execution time?
Regards,
Gustav
On Feb 8, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Gustav Karlsson
> wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski
wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> This patch is my first and obvious approach.
>
> @Merlin, I'm not sure if I get your idea:
> - keep previous behaviour as obligatory? (which is: automatic
> de-duplicating of
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Jordi wrote:
The custom here is to respond in line, not to top-post. Thanks.
>
> So basically you're saying it's hard to do sorting in any way when a gin
> index is involved? Neither with a complete multi-column btree_gin index
> because
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Marc Mamin wrote:
>
> - auto vacuum will not run as these are insert only tables
> - according to this post, auto analyze would also do the job:
>
> http://postgresql.nabble.com/Performance-problem-with-gin-index-td5867870.html
> It seems
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski
> wrote:
>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>
>> This patch is my first and obvious approach.
>>
>> @Merlin, I'm not sure if I get your idea: