On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, Octavio Alvarez wrote:
>
> Hello to everybody.
>
> I ask your help for a severe problem when doing a query that LEFT JOINs
> one table to another ON a field, and then LEFT JOINs again to another
> "instance" of a table ON another field which stores the same entity, but
> with
Hello to everybody.
I ask your help for a severe problem when doing a query that LEFT JOINs
one table to another ON a field, and then LEFT JOINs again to another
"instance" of a table ON another field which stores the same entity, but
with different meaning.
I include 3 EXPLAIN ANALYZEs:
* The f
"Eric Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [ planning a 9-table query takes too long ]
See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/explicit-joins.html
for some useful tips.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3:
if i first do prepare blah as SELECT ., then run execute blah, the
time goes down to about 275ms (i had been running this query a lot, and
did a vacuum update before all this).
If you make it an SQL stored procedure, you get the speed up of the
PREPARE command, without having to prepare man
First let me explain the situation:
I came into the #postgresql irc channel talking about this problem, and
someone advised me to use this mailing list (so i'm not just wasting your
time i hope). I'm not sure how to describe the problem fully, so I'll start
by explaining what my database does,
Mike Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi. I have two existing tables, A and B. A has a 'varchar(1000)' field
> and B has a 'text' field, each with btree indexes defined. When I do a
> join between these, on this field, it seems to a hash join, as opposed
> to using the indexes, as I might exp
Hi. I have two existing tables, A and B. A has a 'varchar(1000)' field
and B has a 'text' field, each with btree indexes defined. When I do a
join between these, on this field, it seems to a hash join, as opposed
to using the indexes, as I might expect (I'm no postgres expert, btw).
My question
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:07:28AM -0500, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> At work, we have been doing a number of tests on 7.4. The
> performance is such an improvement over 7.2 that the QA folks thought
> there must be something wrong. So I suppose the defaults are ok.
I know, I know, replying to mys
Pablo.
> I have a question, I am going to begin a project for the University in
> the area of Data Warehousing and I want to use postgres. Do you have
> some recommendation to me?
Yes. Set up a linux machine if you don't have access to one so you can
load postgresql and start learning how p
Pablo Marrero wrote:
Hello people!
I have a question, I am going to begin a project for the University in
the area of Data Warehousing and I want to use postgres.
Do you have some recommendation to me?
Regarding what? Do you have an specific questions?
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
Thanks!!
Not an option I'm afraid. PostgreSQL just jams and stops logging after
the first rotation...
Are you using a copy truncate method to rotate the logs? In RedHat add
the keyword COPYTRUCATE to your /etc/logrotate.d/syslog file.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
I know some people use this in produc
Hello people!
I have a question, I am going to begin a project for the University in
the area of Data Warehousing and I want to use postgres.
Do you have some recommendation to me?
Thanks!!
Greetings, Pablo
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if
12 matches
Mail list logo
