On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, John Mendenhall wrote:
Our setting for effective_cache_size is 2048.
random_page_cost = 4, effective_cache_size = 2048 time approximately 4500ms
random_page_cost = 3, effective_cache_size = 2048 time approximately 1050ms
random_page_cost = 3, effective_cache_size =
Dennis,
On Fri, 01 Jul 2005, Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, John Mendenhall wrote:
Our setting for effective_cache_size is 2048.
random_page_cost = 4, effective_cache_size = 2048 time approximately
4500ms
random_page_cost = 3, effective_cache_size = 2048 time
pgsql performance gurus,
We ported an application from oracle to postgresql.
We are experiencing an approximately 50% performance
hit. I am in the process of isolating the problem.
I have searched the internet (google) and tried various
things. Only one thing seems to work. I am trying to
find
Thank you very much in advance for any pointers you can
provide. And, if this is the wrong forum for this question,
please let me know and I'll ask it elsewhere.
I think you may want to increase your statistics_target plus make sure
you are running analyze. explain anaylze would do.
John Mendenhall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Merge Join (cost=4272.84..4520.82 rows=1230 width=21) (actual
time=3998.771..4603.739 rows=699 loops=1)
Merge Cond: (outer.contact_id = inner.id)
- Index Scan using lead_requests_contact_id_idx on lead_requests lr
(cost=0.00..74.09
pgsql performance gurus,
I truly appreciate the suggestions provided.
I have tried each one separately to determine the
best fit. I have included results for each suggestion.
I have also included my entire postgresql.conf file so
you can see our base configuration.
Each result is based on an
