On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
let's see the query plan...when you turned it off, did it go faster?
put your suspicious plans here: http://explain.depesz.com/
I suggest to post three plans:
1. insert into temp table
2. access to temp table before
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:11 AM, Robert Klemme
shortcut...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
let's see the query plan...when you turned it off, did it go faster?
put your suspicious plans here: http://explain.depesz.com/
I suggest
Hello,
I've heard from some people that synchronous streaming replication has
severe performance impact on the primary. They said that the transaction
throughput of TPC-C like benchmark (perhaps DBT-2) decreased by 50%. I'm
sorry I haven't asked them about their testing environment, because
Hi,
I would be really grateful for feedback regardding this issue. Tom?
Should Ifile a bug-report about the optimizer trying too hard to
collapse the subquery and therefor generating a bad plan?
Its my understanding that a IN shouldn't perform any worse than ANY on
an ARRAY, right?
Thank you in
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:06 AM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've heard from some people that synchronous streaming replication has
severe performance impact on the primary. They said that the transaction
throughput of TPC-C like benchmark (perhaps DBT-2) decreased by 50%. I'm
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:06 AM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
I've heard from some people that synchronous streaming replication has
severe performance impact on the primary. They said that the transaction
throughput
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Robert Klemme
shortcut...@googlemail.com wrote:
I am not sure whether the replicant can be triggered to commit to disk
before the commit to disk on the master has succeeded; if that was the
case there would be true serialization = 50%.
This sounds like it
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Robert Klemme
shortcut...@googlemail.com wrote:
I am not sure whether the replicant can be triggered to commit to disk
before the commit to disk on the master has succeeded; if that
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Robert Klemme
shortcut...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Robert Klemme
shortcut...@googlemail.com wrote:
I am not sure whether the replicant can be triggered to
From: Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:06 AM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've heard from some people that synchronous streaming replication has
severe performance impact on the primary. They said that the transaction
throughput of TPC-C like benchmark
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 7:34 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
I can't speak for other databases, but it's only natural to assume
that tps must drop. At minimum, you have to add the latency of
communication and remote sync operation to your transaction time. For
very short transactions
11 matches
Mail list logo
