Aaron Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well before I go about re-architecting things, it would be good to
have a strong understanding of just what is going on. Obviously, the
unique index on the char(48) is the killer. What I don't know is:
You have another unique index on the integer
We've done a lot of testing on large DB's with a lot of inserts and
have a few comments.
The updates are treated as a large insert as we all know from pg's
point of view.
We've run into 2 classes of problems: excessing WAL checkpoints and
affects of low correlation.
WAL log write's full 8K
On 2/12/06, Marc Morin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From your config, a check point will be forced when
(checkpoint_segments * 16 M) rows * (8K/N*h + (1-h)*8K) * B
Where h is the hitrate or correlation between the update scan and the
index. Do you have a sense of what this is?
I know my
On 2/12/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aaron Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well before I go about re-architecting things, it would be good to
have a strong understanding of just what is going on. Obviously, the
unique index on the char(48) is the killer. What I don't know is:
Hi
all,
My
databasehasan SQL function. The result comes in 30-40 seconds
when i use the SQL function. On the other hand; The result comes
300-400 milliseconds when
irun
If you have only recently analyzed the tables in the query, close your psql
session (if that's what you were using) and then restart it. I've gotten burned
by asking a query using the function, which I believe is when PG creates the
plan for the function, and then making significant changes to
Hi, Aaron,
Aaron Turner wrote:
4) Does decoding the data (currently base64) and storing the binary
data improve the distribution of the index, thereby masking it more
efficent?
Yes, but then you should not use varchar, but a bytea.
If your data is some numer internally, numeric or decimal
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 10:25:28PM +0200, Adnan DURSUN wrote:
My database has an SQL function. The result comes in 30-40 seconds
when i use the SQL function. On the other hand; The result comes
300-400 milliseconds when i run the SQL statement. Any idea ??
Have you analyzed the tables? If
