[PERFORM] Explicit joins

2011-05-05 Thread Rishabh Kumar Jain
I referred chapter 14.3 of postgres document version 9.0. explicit joins help the planner in planninng thus improve performance. On what relations are explicit joins to be added?? I am getting data from 10 tables in a view. I don't know on which pair of tables I have to add explicit joins to

Re: [PERFORM] Postgres 9.0.4 + Hot Standby + FusionIO Drive + Performance = Query failed ERROR: catalog is missing 1 attribute(s) for relid 172226

2011-05-05 Thread Sethu Prasad
I did the hot standby configured earlier and at that time I started using(querying) the standby database. May be something missed on the archive command. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: While doing so I got the *Query failed ERROR: catalog is missing 1

Re: [PERFORM] amazon ec2

2011-05-05 Thread Dave Page
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: FWIW, EnterpriseDB's InfiniCache provides the same caching benefit. The way that works is when PG goes to evict a page from shared buffers that page gets compressed and stuffed into a memcache cluster. When PG determines

Re: [PERFORM] Explicit joins

2011-05-05 Thread Kevin Grittner
Rishabh Kumar Jain rishabh.w...@yahoo.com wrote: I am getting data from 10 tables in a view. I don't know on which pair of tables I have to add explicit joins to improve performance. There's usually some fairly natural order in terms of understanding the request. I find it's often good to

[PERFORM] Poor query plan chosen in 9.0.3 vs 8.3.7

2011-05-05 Thread Brian Connolly
We have a generated query from our web application which takes far longer to complete in 9.0.4, than in 8.3.7 (60sec in 9.0.4 ~10sec in 8.3.7) The query plan generated in 9.0, includes a Materialize step which takes the bulk of the time for the query. If I disable materialize (by running set

Re: [PERFORM] VX_CONCURRENT flag on vxfs( 5.1 or later) for performance for postgresql?

2011-05-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 4:51 AM, Hsien-Wen Chu chu.hsien@gmail.com wrote: since the block size is 8k for the default, and it consisted with many tuple/line; as my understand, if any tuple/line is changed(maybe update, insert, delete). the block will be marked as dirty block. and then it

Re: [PERFORM] ask the database engine tuning on the server

2011-05-05 Thread Kevin Grittner
Didik Prasetyo prasetyodidi...@yahoo.com wrote: I had a problem with performance engine database, I use the server with the following specifications 1. its storage configuration? Storage SCSI 15K RAID 5 2. how his network? 2 gigabit bonding. 3. type / behavior of

Re: [PERFORM] Poor query plan chosen in 9.0.3 vs 8.3.7

2011-05-05 Thread Brian Connolly
Here is the explain analyze output for when enable_material is 'off' and information on the postgresql version, settings and server configuration (I had to send a follow up email due the length of email restrictions on the mailing list.) (I apologize for the length of these email messages. And if

Re: [PERFORM] Poor query plan chosen in 9.0.3 vs 8.3.7

2011-05-05 Thread Bosco Rama
Hey Brian, Brian Connolly wrote: (I had to send a follow up email due the length of email restrictions on the mailing list.) A tip for when you have this problem in the future -- turn off html mail. It will reduce your email message length by 50% - 90%. HTH Bosco. -- Sent via

Re: [PERFORM] Poor query plan chosen in 9.0.3 vs 8.3.7

2011-05-05 Thread Tom Lane
Brian Connolly bc...@labkey.com writes: Any help that you can provide would be greatly appreciated. I'd suggest trying to get rid of the weird little subselects, like this one: ... SELECT * FROM assayresult.c69d129_particle_size_result_fields WHERE (((SELECT Container FROM exp.Data WHERE