On 2010-11-02 22.21, Mladen Gogala wrote:
Can you hear me now?
sure
--
Regards,
Robert "roppert" Gravsjö
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
Can you hear me now?
--
Mladen Gogala
Sr. Oracle DBA
1500 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(212) 329-5251
http://www.vmsinfo.com
The Leader in Integrated Media Intelligence Solutions
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscrip
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Mark Steben wrote:
> Hi all – sorry to create additional email ‘noise’
>
> But I’ve been trying to post a rather long query to
>
> The pgsql-performance user list. Dave thought
>
> That it might have been bounced due to the length
>
> And suggested I send a short
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Mark Steben wrote:
Subject: [PERFORM] test send (recommended by Dave Page)
Hi all - sorry to create additional email 'noise'
But I've been trying to post a rather long query to
The pgsql-performance user list. Dave thought
That it might have been bou
Hi all - sorry to create additional email 'noise'
But I've been trying to post a rather long query to
The pgsql-performance user list. Dave thought
That it might have been bounced due to the length
And suggested I send a short 'blast'
If this works I'll send a shortened version of my query
sorry, I just wonder why I can't get my message delivered...
--
Üdvözlettel,
Gábriel Ákos
-=E-Mail :akos.gabr...@i-logic.hu|Web: http://www.i-logic.hu=-
-=Tel/fax:+3612391618|Mobil:+36209278894 =-
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
Christo Du Preez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Fast:
> "public";"layertype";"parentid";0.98797;4;2;"{4,1}";"{0.00902256,0.00300752}";"";-0.142857
> Slow:
> "public";"layertype";"parentid";0.00745157;4;7;"{300}";"{0.976155}";"{1,1,4,5,8,12}";0.92262
Well, those statistics are almost completely dif
Fast:
"public";"layertype";"id";0;4;-1;"";"";"{1,442,508,575,641,708,774,840,907,973,1040}";0.95
"public";"layertype";"label";0;14;-0.971429;"{arch,bank,bench,canyon,gap,hill,hills,levee,mountain,mountains}";"{0.00300752,0.00300752,0.00300752,0.00300752,0.00300752,0.00300752,0.00300752,0.00300
Christo Du Preez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, I have just about tried every combination of vacuum on the
> database. Just to make 100% sure.
Well, there's something mighty wacko about that rowcount estimate;
even if you didn't have stats, the estimate for a simple equality
constraint oughtn'
Yes, I have just about tried every combination of vacuum on the
database. Just to make 100% sure.
Tom Lane wrote:
> Christo Du Preez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On my laptop the explain analyze looks like this:
>>
>
>
>> "Index Scan using fki_layertype_parentid on layertype (cost=
Christo Du Preez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On my laptop the explain analyze looks like this:
> "Index Scan using fki_layertype_parentid on layertype (cost=0.00..8.27
> rows=1 width=109)"
> " Index Cond: (parentid = 300)"
OK ...
> and on the problem server:
> "Seq Scan on layertype (cost=
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 04:11:33PM +0200, Christo Du Preez wrote:
> The actual table I noticed the problem has a million rows and it still
> doesn't use indexing
Then please post an EXPLAIN ANALYZE of the query that is slow, along with the
table definition and indexes.
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 03:32:40PM +0200, Christo Du Preez wrote:
> As an example I took a table with about 650 rows, having a parentid
> field with an index on parentid.
Try a bigger table. Using an index for only 650 rows is almost always
suboptimal, so it's no wonder the planner doesn't use the
> From: Christo Du Preez
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:38 AM
>
> Where do I set the planner settings or are you reffering to
> settings in postgres.conf that may affect the planner?
>
Yes I'm reffering to settings in postgres.conf. I'm wondering if
enable_indexscan or something got turned o
Christo Du Preez wrote:
> The actual table I noticed the problem has a million rows and it still
> doesn't use indexing
So ANALYZE it.
--
Alvaro Herrera Developer, http://www.PostgreSQL.org/
"Amanece. (Ignacio Reyes)
El Cerr
The actual table I noticed the problem has a million rows and it still
doesn't use indexing
Reid Thompson wrote:
> try it with a table with 650K rows...
>
> On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 15:32 +0200, Christo Du Preez wrote:
>
>> Good day,
>>
>> I have noticed that my server never uses indexing. No matt
"Christo Du Preez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On my laptop the explain analyze looks like this:
>
> "Index Scan using fki_layertype_parentid on layertype (cost=0.00..8.27
> rows=1 width=109)"
> " Index Cond: (parentid = 300)"
That's not "explain analyze", that's just plain "explain".
--
On Jun 12, 2007, at 8:32 , Christo Du Preez wrote:
I have noticed that my server never uses indexing. No matter what I
do.
As an example I took a table with about 650 rows, having a parentid
field with an index on parentid.
EXPLAIN ANALYZE
SELECT *
FROM layertype
where parentid = 300;
T
try it with a table with 650K rows...
On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 15:32 +0200, Christo Du Preez wrote:
> Good day,
>
> I have noticed that my server never uses indexing. No matter what I do.
>
> As an example I took a table with about 650 rows, having a parentid
> field with an index on parentid.
>
>
Good day,
I have noticed that my server never uses indexing. No matter what I do.
As an example I took a table with about 650 rows, having a parentid
field with an index on parentid.
EXPLAIN ANALYZE
SELECT *
FROM layertype
where parentid = 300;
On my laptop the explain analyze looks like this
Where do I set the planner settings or are you reffering to settings in
postgres.conf that may affect the planner?
The one badly performing laptop is the same as mine (the fast one) and
the server is much more powerful.
Laptops: Intel Centrino Duo T2600 @ 2.16GHz, 1.98 GB RAM
Server: 2 xIntel Pe
I wonder if my dump/restore routine isn't causing this issue. Seeing
that I do the db development on my laptop (the fast one) and then
restores it on the other two machines. I have confirmed if all the
indexes are present after a restore.
This is the routine:
/usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_dump -t layer
On 2007-06-11 Christo Du Preez wrote:
I really hope someone can shed some light on my problem. I'm not sure
if this is a posgres or potgis issue.
Anyway, we have 2 development laptops and one live server, somehow I
managed to get the same query to perform very well om my laptop, but
on both the
> -Original Message-
> From: Christo Du Preez
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:10 AM
>
> I have narrowed down the problem (I think) and it's the query
> planner using different plans and I haven't got a clue why.
> Can anyone please shed some light on this?
Different plans can be caused
On 2007-06-11 Christo Du Preez wrote:
> I really hope someone can shed some light on my problem. I'm not sure
> if this is a posgres or potgis issue.
>
> Anyway, we have 2 development laptops and one live server, somehow I
> managed to get the same query to perform very well om my laptop, but
> on
Hi All,
I really hope someone can shed some light on my problem. I'm not sure if
this is a posgres or potgis issue.
Anyway, we have 2 development laptops and one live server, somehow I
managed to get the same query to perform very well om my laptop, but on
both the server and the other laptop it'
Test...please ignore
Thanks
Mike
You just couldn't help yourself, could you? :-)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
please ignore if this goes through. They've been bouncing and I'm trying to
find out why.
-m
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
David Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a size limit to an email
IIRC, the standard policy on the pgsql lists is that messages over 40K
or so will be delayed for moderator approval. However, you should have
gotten immediate replies from the majordomo 'bot telling you so. If you
go
I've posted several emails, and have yet to see one
show up (this one might not either).
Is there a size limit to an email (it had a big
analyze, and schema information)??
David
31 matches
Mail list logo
