On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Generally, table partitioning is not a good idea unless you are
dealing with really large tables, and nearly all of your queries apply
only to a single partition. Most likely you are better off not using
table
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Mark Thornton mthorn...@optrak.co.uk wrote:
It is a temporary table and thus I hadn't thought to analyze it. How should
such tables be treated? Should I analyze it immediately after creation (i.e.
when it is empty), after filling it or ... ? The expected usage is
I can't remember
anyone ever complaining ANALYZE took too long to run. I only
remember complaints of the form I had to remember to manually run it
and I wish it had just happened by itself.
Robert,
This sounds like an argument in favor of an implicit ANALYZE after all
COPY statements,
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Well that already happens...
My understanding is that auto-analyze will fire only after my
transaction is completed, because it is a seperate daemon. If I do
like so:
BEGIN;
COPY ...;
-- Dangerously un-analyzed
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Mladen Gogala mladen.gog...@vmsinfo.com wrote:
I was surprised because I expected array bind to produce better
results over the network than the row-by-row operations, yet it
didn't. Can anybody elaborate a bit?
While all of the bulk-execute functions are
