Here is the explain analyze of the query:
explain analyze select count(*) from actvars, prodlevel where
actvars.product_level=prodlevel.code_level and
prodlevel.division_level='OY3S5LAPALL6';
Aggregate (cost=3123459.62..3123459.62 rows=1 width=32) (actual
time=1547173.60..1547173.60 rows=1 loop
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Here is the explain analyze of the query:
> explain analyze select count(*) from actvars, prodlevel where
> actvars.product_level=prodlevel.code_level and
> prodlevel.division_level='OY3S5LAPALL6';
> [ slow merge join ]
I wonder whether a hash join wouldn't work better
Hi, i'm on the verge of buying a "MegaRAID SCSI 320-2" raid controller.
I need it to build a db server using 4x ultra320 scsi disks
i'm thinking raid 1+0 but will try with raid5 too and compare
Does anyone have any experience with this model, good or bad i'd like to
know.. thanks :)
as seen:
htt
On 2003-09-27T18:24:33+0100, Richard Jones wrote:
> i'm on the verge of buying a "MegaRAID SCSI 320-2" raid controller.
You may want to check out the PCI-X version of this controller that
LSILogic just released (MegaRAID SCSI 320-2X). PCI-X is backwards
compatible with PCI, but also gives you gre
On Sat, 2003-09-27 at 12:24, Richard Jones wrote:
> Hi, i'm on the verge of buying a "MegaRAID SCSI 320-2" raid controller.
> I need it to build a db server using 4x ultra320 scsi disks
> i'm thinking raid 1+0 but will try with raid5 too and compare
>
> Does anyone have any experience with this mo
RIchard,
> Hi, i'm on the verge of buying a "MegaRAID SCSI 320-2" raid controller.
> I need it to build a db server using 4x ultra320 scsi disks
> i'm thinking raid 1+0 but will try with raid5 too and compare
Depends on your type of database. If you're doing web or OLAP (lots of
read-only queri
For the application that I'm working on, we want to
use data types that are database independent. (most
databases has decimal, but not big int).
Anyhow, we are planning on using decimal(19,0) for our
primary keys instead of a big int, would there be a
performance difference in using a bigint over
"Yusuf W." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For the application that I'm working on, we want to
> use data types that are database independent. (most
> databases has decimal, but not big int).
Most databases have bigint, I think.
> Anyhow, we are planning on using decimal(19,0) for our
> primary ke
Now, I've got to convince my project's software
architech, that a bigint would be better than a
decimal.
Does anyone know where I could get some documentation
on how the int and decimal are implemented so I could
prove to him that ints are better? Can people suggest
good points to make in order
Yusuf,
> Does anyone know where I could get some documentation
> on how the int and decimal are implemented so I could
> prove to him that ints are better? Can people suggest
> good points to make in order to prove it?
RTFM:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/interactive/datatype.html#DATATYPE-N
10 matches
Mail list logo