Re: [PERFORM] Why so much time difference with a same query/plan?

On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 13:30:15 +0100, Karl Vogel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This depends on the version of Oracle you're using. Oracle 9i > introduced Index Skip Scans: > > http://www.oracle.com/technology//products/oracle9i/daily/apr22.html > > I don't know whether pg has something si

[PERFORM] Optimization while compiling

Dear all, What would be the best configure line that would suite for optimization As I understand by eliminating unwanted modules, I would make the DB lighter and faster. Lets say the module needed are only english module with LC_collate C module type. How could we eliminate the unwanted modul

Re: [PERFORM] sudden drop in statement turnaround latency -- yay!.

"Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I took advantage of the holidays to update a production server (dual > Opteron on win2k) from an 11/16 build (about beta5 or so) to the latest > release candidate. No configuration changes were made, just a binary > swap and a server stop/start. >

Re: [PERFORM] Why so much time difference with a same query/plan?

Yann Michel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Dec 22, 2004 at 01:52:40PM -0800, Litao Wu wrote: >> Does the order of columns in the index matter since >> more than 50% customer_id = 158? >> >> I think it does not in Oracle. >> >> Will the performance be better if I change index >> xxx_idx to

Re: [PERFORM] Speed in V8.0

Thats was it. Now the speed was ok. Thank you. - Thomas Wegner CabrioMeter - The Weather Plugin for Trillian http://www.wegner24.de/cabriometer "Ragnar "Hafstað"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Wed, 2004-12-22 at

Re: [PERFORM] Speed in V8.0

Ok, i installed the 7.4.3 on the dev machine under Cygwin and the was 4 times slower than the V8. They need 394 seconds. Whats wrong with my dev machine. There was enough free memory available. - Thomas Wegner CabrioMeter - The Weather Plugin for Trillian

Re: [PERFORM] Howto Increased performace ?

Iain wrote: sort_mem 4096 (=400MB RAM for 100 connections) If I understand correctly, memory usage related to `sort_mem' is per connection *and* per sort. If every client runs a query with 3 sorts in its plan, you are going to need (in theory) 100 connections * 4Mb * 3 sorts, which is 1.2 Gb. Pleas

[PERFORM] sudden drop in statement turnaround latency -- yay!.

I took advantage of the holidays to update a production server (dual Opteron on win2k) from an 11/16 build (about beta5 or so) to the latest release candidate. No configuration changes were made, just a binary swap and a server stop/start. I was shocked to see that statement latency dropped by