On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 7:53 AM, Rick Otten
wrote:
> Some of my data processes use large quantities of temp space - 5 or 6T
> anyway.
>
> We are running in Google Cloud. In order to get the best performance out
> of all of my queries that might need temp space, I've configured temp space
> on a
Here's a weird one I can't figure out: the definitions of several columns
of a view, which are not used in a query at all, have a massive effect on
the query planner, causing it to choose a seqscan over the largest table in
our database when it should be using the primary key for the join.
Backgrou
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-03-16 13:37:05 -0700, Craig James wrote:
> > The timing of the second query is excellent, and is what I expected. I
> > don't understand why including a function-defined column in the view
> w
One of our four "big iron" (spinning disks) servers went belly up today.
(Thanks, Postgres and pgbackrest! Easy recovery.) We're planning to move to
a cloud service at the end of the year, so bad timing on this. We didn't
want to buy any more hardware, but now it looks like we have to.
I followed
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:21 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh
wrote:
> På tirsdag 10. april 2018 kl. 04:36:27, skrev Craig James <
> cja...@emolecules.com>:
>
> One of our four "big iron" (spinning disks) servers went belly up today.
> (Thanks, Postgres and pgbackrest! Ea
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> What would the list think of a web form for submitting problems the
> performance
> list, similar to the pgsql-bugs form?
>
> Alternately, or perhaps additionally, a script (hopefully bundled with
> postgres) which collects at least the non-
On Postgres 9.6 (config below), I have a case I don't understand: three
tables that can be separately queried in milliseconds, but when put
together into one view using UNION, take 150 seconds to query. Here's the
rough idea (actual details below):
create view thesaurus as
(select id,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:45 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 03:40:58PM -0700, Craig James wrote:
> > On Postgres 9.6 (config below), I have a case I don't understand: three
> > tables that can be separately queried in milliseconds, but when put
> > to
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 4:31 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 04:30:24PM -0700, Craig James wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:45 PM Justin Pryzby
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 03:40:58PM -0700, Craig James wrote:
> > > > O
I'm completely baffled by this problem: I'm doing a delete that joins three
modest-sized tables, and it gets completely stuck: 100% CPU use forever.
Here's the query:
explain analyze
select count(1) from registry.categories
where category_id = 15 and id in
(select c.id from registry.categor
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 2:29 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-11-14 14:19:51 -0800, Craig James wrote:
> > I'm completely baffled by this problem: I'm doing a delete that joins
> three
> > modest-sized tables, and it gets completely stuck: 100% CPU
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 2:45 PM Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 5:20 PM Craig James wrote:
>
>> I'm completely baffled by this problem: I'm doing a delete that joins
>> three modest-sized tables, and it gets completely stuck: 100% CPU use
&
Problem solved ... see below. Thanks everyone for your suggestions and
insights!
On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 7:16 AM Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 7:27 PM Craig James wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 2:45 PM Jeff Janes wrote:
>> BTW, I'll note at t
oud equivalent is for low-cost storage) backup with just modest bandwidth
usage.
In a cloud environment, you can do this on modestly-priced hardware (a few
CPUs, modest memory). In the event of a failover, unmount your backup disk,
spin up a big server, mount the database, do the incremental res
(I've changed the original subject, "autovacuum locking question", of the
sender's email so as not to hijack that thread.)
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 2:26 PM Mike Schanne wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am investigating a performance problem...
> ... This email is non-binding, is subject to contract, and neither
15 matches
Mail list logo
