On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 5:30 PM, PFCli...@peufeu.com wrote:
lzo is much, much, (much) faster than zlib. Note, I've tried several
decompression speed is even more awesome...
times to contact the author to get clarification on licensing terms
and have been unable to get a response.
lzop and
2009/8/2 Adam PAPAI w...@wooh.hu:
Hello,
I have a problem with an inner join + count().
my query is:
explain analyze select
k.idn,k.kerdes_subject,k.kerdes_text,u.vezeteknev,u.keresztnev,u.idn as
user_id, kg.kategoria_neve, count(v.idn)
FROM kategoriak as kg
INNER JOIN kerdesek as k
Thanks for the response kevin.
DB size is about 30G. Bloat could have been due to recent load testing
that was done. Autovaccum wasn't aggressive enough to catch up with load
testing. I will rebuild those indexes if possible reload the table
itself as they are bloated too.
Sure I will collect
On 8/4/09 8:30 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Merlin Moncure escribió:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 5:30 PM, PFCli...@peufeu.com wrote:
lzo is much, much, (much) faster than zlib. Note, I've tried several
decompression speed is even more awesome...
times to contact
Scott Carey sc...@richrelevance.com writes:
There are a handful of other compression algorithms very similar to LZO in
performance / compression level under various licenses.
LZO is just the best known and most widely used.
And after we get done with the license question, we need to ask about
Hi,
I am using postgresql 8.3 with FreeBSD. FreeBSD is using syslog by
default for postgresql logs.
I would like to disable syslog in postgresql.conf. Does this change
increase the performance?
What is the impact of using syslog on postgresql performance?
Thanks.
--
Sent via pgsql-performance
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Matthew Wakelingmatt...@flymine.org wrote:
I'm seeing an interesting phenomenon while I'm trying to
performance-optimise a GiST index. Basically, running a performance test
appears to be the same thing as running a random number generator. For
example, here
Hi All,
I encountered an odd issue regarding check constraints complaining
when they're not really violated.
For this particular machine, I am running 8.3.7, but on a machine
running 8.3.5, it seems to have succeeded. I also upgraded a third
machine from 8.3.5 to 8.3.7, and the query
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Beats me. It looks like the first few queries are pulling stuff into
cache, and then after that it settles down, but I'm not sure why it
takes 5 repetitions to do that. Is the plan changing?
Yeah, we're just guessing
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Richard Yend...@richyen.com wrote:
The data reads:
tii=# select date_start, date_end, term_length, '2009-09-03
05:38:24.030331-07'::timestamptz - date_start AS new_term_length from
m_class where id = 2652020;
date_start | date_end
Hi All,
I encountered an odd issue regarding check constraints complaining
when they're not really violated.
For this particular machine, I am running 8.3.7, but on a machine
running 8.3.5, it seems to have succeeded. I also upgraded a third
machine from 8.3.5 to 8.3.7, and the query succeeded
Hi Folks,
Thanks for your response.
I have added the following index (suggested by other post):
CREATE INDEX events_events_cleared_eventtype
ON events_events
USING btree
(eventtype_id, cleared)
WHERE cleared = false;
Also with columns in reversed order.
No changes in response time
12 matches
Mail list logo
