I have a large table but not as large as the kind of numbers that get
discussed on this list. It has 125 million rows.
REINDEXing the table takes half a day, and it's still not finished.
To write this post I did "SELECT COUNT(*)", and here's the output -- so long!
select count(*) from links;
should I check to determine the cost delay -- what's the specific
formula?
Thanks!
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Phoenix Kiula
> wrote:
>> I have a large table but not as large as the kind of numbers that get
>
[Ppsted similar note to PG General but I suppose it's more appropriate
in this list. Apologies for cross-posting.]
Hi. Further to my bafflement with the "count(*)" queries as described
in this thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2009-01/msg00804.php
It seems that whenever this q
I'm on a CentOS 5 OS 64 bit, latest kernel and all of that.
PG version is 8.3.7, compiled as 64bit.
The memory is 8GB.
It's a 2 x Dual Core Intel 5310.
Hard disks are Raid 1, SCSI 15 rpm.
The server is running just one website. So there's Apache 2.2.11,
MySQL (for some small tasks, almost negligib
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:25 PM, Andy Colson wrote:
.
>
> the first line of vmstat is an average since bootup. Kinda useless. run it
> as: 'vmstat 4'
>
> it will print a line every 4 seconds, which will be a summary of everything
> that happened in the last 4 seconds.
>
> since boot,
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Andy Colson wrote:
>
> Phoenix: run top again, and hit the '1' key. It'll show you stats for
each
> cpu. Is one pegged and the others idle?
>
top - 10:38:53 up 29 days, 5 min, 1 user, load average: 64.99, 65.17,
65.06
Tasks: 568 total, 1 running, 537 slee
eciate any thoughts or pointers.
Thanks!
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Phoenix Kiula
> wrote:
>> I have a large table but not as large as the kind of numbers that get
>> discussed on this list. It has 125 millio
Thanks for these suggestions.
I am beginning to wonder if the issue is deeper.
I set autovacuum to off, then turned off all the connections to the
database, and did a manual vacuum just to see how long it takes.
This was last night my time. I woke up this morning and it has still
not finished.
2.19.193.26/products/serial_ata2-9000.asp
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Phoenix Kiula wrote:
> Thanks for these suggestions.
>
> I am beginning to wonder if the issue is deeper.
>
> I set autovacuum to off, then turned off all the connections to the
> database, and did a manua
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 11:19 PM, Phoenix Kiula
> wrote:
>> Btw, hardware is not an issue. My db has been working fine for a
>> while. Smaller poorer systems around the web run InnoDB databases. I
>> wouldn't
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
>
> Dhimant Patel wrote:
>
> > I am a new comer on postgres world and now using it for some
> > serious (at least for me) projects. I have a need where I am
> > running some analytical + aggregate functions on data where
> > ordering is don
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> On 04/23/2011 03:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 17, 2011, at 11:30 AM, Phoenix Kiula
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Postgres is 8.2.9.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> An upgrade wo
Hi. I'm on a 64 Bit CentOS 5 system, quadcore processor, 8GB RAM and
tons of data storage (1 TB SATAII disks).
The current SHMMAX and SHMMIN are (commas added for legibility) --
kernel.shmmax = 68,719,476,736
kernel.shmall = 4,294,967,296
Now, according to my reading in the PG manual and this li
13 matches
Mail list logo
