On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Scott Marlowe
wrote:
> So do iostat or iotop show you if / where your disks are working
> hardest? Or is this CPU overhead that's killing performance?
>
Sorry for the delayed reply. I took a look in more detail at the query
plans from our problem query during t
Hi all,
I have come across a unexpected behavior.
You can see full detail on an issue on the QGEP project in Github :
https://github.com/QGEP/QGEP/issues/308#issuecomment-323122514
Basically, we have this view with some LEFT JOIN :
http://paste.debian.net/982003/
We have indexes on some fields (
On 19/08/17 02:21, Jeremy Finzel wrote:
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Scott Marlowe
mailto:scott.marl...@gmail.com>> wrote:
So do iostat or iotop show you if / where your disks are working
hardest? Or is this CPU overhead that's killing performance?
Sorry for the delayed reply.
Nice!
Pleased that the general idea worked well for you!
I'm also relieved that you did not follow my recommendation exactly -
I'm been trialling a Samsung 960 Evo (256GB) and Intel 600p (256GB) and
I've stumbled across the serious disadvantages of (consumer) M.2 drives
using TLC NAND - terri
