On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 01:58:34 +0100, "Marinos J. Yannikos"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm looking for ideas that might improve the interactive performance of
>the system, without slowing down the updates too much.
IOW, you could accept slower updates. Did you actually try and throttle
down the i
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 05:19:27PM -0500, Chris Ruprecht wrote:
> what he's doing, this might be a bottleneck. I don't like the virtual memory
> strategy of Linux too much and would rather increase this to 1 - 2 GB for the
> Postgres DB - Specially since he's not running anything else on the mac
Marinos, while you are busy answering my first set of questions :-),
here is an idea that might help even out resource consumption.
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 01:58:34 +0100, "Marinos J. Yannikos"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>begin transaction;
> delete from t where id=5;
> insert into t (id,...) valu
All, thanks for your suggestions. I've tweaked my configuration, and I
think I've squeezed a little more performance out of the setup. I also
tried running several tests simultaneously against postgres and SQL
Server, and postgres did much better with the heavy load.
My new settings are:
max_co
Courier NewHello again. I'm setting up a backup routine for my new db server. As part of my testing, I'm attempting to pg_restore a pg_dump'ed backup of my database. The database is about 4.3 GB, and the dump file is about 100 MB.
I first did a schema-only restore, then started a data-only restore
> "LO" == Leon Out <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LO> Josh, the disks in the new system should be substantially faster than
LO> the old. Both are Ultra160 SCSI RAID 5 arrays, but the new system has
LO> 15k RPM disks, as opposed to the 10k RPM disks in the old system.
If you've got the time, try
> Josh, the disks in the new system should be substantially faster than
> the old. Both are Ultra160 SCSI RAID 5 arrays, but the new system has
> 15k RPM disks, as opposed to the 10k RPM disks in the old system.
Spindle speed does not correlate with 'throughput' in any easy way. What
controllers
> "LO" == Leon Out <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LO> project. The results so far have been disappointing, with Postgres
LO> performing queries in about the same time as SQL Server even though
LO> Postgres is running on a dedicated box with about 4 times the clock
LO> speed of the SQL Server box.
Greetings!
Why does creation of gist indexes takes significantly more time
than normal btree index. Can any configuration changes lead to faster index
creation?
query:
CREATE INDEX co_name_index_idx ON profiles USING gist (co_name_index
public.gist_txtidx_ops);
regds
mallah.
