Dear all,
I have a problem with seqscan I hope you might help me with.
Attached is the simple script that reproduces a database and results, which I
have tested both on 9.0.4 and 9.3-devel with identical results.
I need to have a sort of a time machine, where select statements on tables
could
On 27/02/2013 9:29 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Andre,
Please see the related thread on this list, High CPU usage / load
average after upgrading to Ubuntu 12.04. You may be experiencing some
of the same issues. General perspective seems to be that kernels 3.0
through 3.4 have serious performance
Dmitry Karasik dmi...@karasik.eu.org writes:
I need to have a sort of a time machine, where select statements on tables
could be easily replaced to select statements on tables as they were some
time in the past,
including all related table. To do so, I used views (see in the script) that
Quick follow up... I've found that the row estimate in:
explain select count(id) from versions where project_id IN (80,115)
AND project_id=115;
QUERY PLAN
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Carlo Stonebanks
stonec.regis...@sympatico.ca wrote:
Is each of these write operations just covering a single row? Does this
description apply to just one of the many (how many?) databases, so that
there are really 14*N concurrent sessions?
** **
**
pgbouncer is more for making connections line up single-file when the
line is moving at a very fast clip, say 0.01 second per turn. If I were
trying to make tasks that can each last for hours or days line up and take
turns, I don't think pgbouncer would be the way to go.
The recommendation
Someone commented they think it might be related to this kernel bug:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/9/210
We have some evidence that that is the case.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list
I had thought you were saying that any one ETL procedure into one database
used 14 concurrent threads. But really, each ETL procedure is
single-threaded, and there can be up to 5 (or theoretically up to 14) of
them running at a time into different databases?
Sorry, just caught this.
