Hi,
We are experiencing slow performance on 8 Beta 2 Dev3 on Win32 and are
trying to determine why. Any info is appreciated.
We have a Web Server and a DB server both running Win2KServer with all
service packs and critical updates.
An ASP page on the Web Server hits the DB Server with a simple
Hi all,
I recently migrated my database from schema
'public' to multiple schema.
I have around 100 tables, and divided them in
14different schemas, and then adapted my application to use schemas as
well.
I could percept that the query / insert/
update times get pretty much faster then when
Igor,
I'm not sure if it is proper to state that schemas are themselves speeding things up.
As an example, we have data that is usually accessed by county; when we put all of the
data into one big table and select from it using a code for a county of interest, the
process is fairly slow as
Bill,
In order to manifest the context switch problem you will definitely
require clients to be set to more than one in pgbench. It only occurs
when 2 or more backends need access to shared memory.
If you want help backpatching Gavin's patch I'll be glad to do it for
you, but you do need a
Hi all,
I'm trying to find smarter ways to dig data from
my database, and have the following scenario:
table1
-- id
-- name
.
.
.
.
.
.
table2
-- id
-- number
.
.
.
.
.
.
I want to create a view to give me back just
what I want:
The id, the name and the number.
I tought in doing the
First off, I'd like to get involved with these tests - pressure of other
work only has prevented me.
Here's my take on the results so far:
I think taking the ratio of the memory allocated to shared_buffers against
the total memory available on the server is completely fallacious. That is
why
Simon,
lots of good stuff clipped
If you draw a graph of speedup (y) against cache size as a
% of total database size, the graph looks like an upside-down L - i.e.
the graph rises steeply as you give it more memory, then turns sharply at a
particular point, after which it flattens out. The
On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 16:57 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
Simon,
lots of good stuff clipped
If you draw a graph of speedup (y) against cache size as a
% of total database size, the graph looks like an upside-down L - i.e.
the graph rises steeply as you give it more memory, then turns
On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 04:38, Igor Maciel Macaubas wrote:
I have around 100 tables, and divided them in 14 different schemas,
and then adapted my application to use schemas as well.
I could percept that the query / insert / update times get pretty much
faster then when I was using the old
Aaron Werman wrote:
pg to my mind is unique in not trying to avoid OS buffering. Other
dbmses spend a substantial effort to create a virtual OS (task
management, I/O drivers, etc.) both in code and support. Choosing mmap
seems such a limiting an option - it adds OS dependency and limits
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Riggs):
I say this: ARC in 8.0 PostgreSQL allows us to sensibly allocate as
large a shared_buffers cache as is required by the database
workload, and this should not be constrained to a small percentage
of server RAM.
I don't think that this particularly follows
Kevin Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm...something just occurred to me about this.
Would a hybrid approach be possible? That is, use mmap() to handle
reads, and use write() to handle writes?
Nope. Have you read the specs regarding mmap-vs-stdio synchronization?
Basically it says that
12 matches
Mail list logo
