On 30 Jul 2003 at 12:54, Rajesh Kumar Mallah wrote:
> Can any one point me the recent guide done by
> Sridhar and Josh i want to see what i mis(read|understood)
> from there ;-) [ it was on GeneralBits' Home Page ]
http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/Tidbits/perf.html
HTH
Bye
Shridhar
--
pr
Rajesh Kumar Mallah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What lead to degradation was the bumping off of
> effective_cache_size parameter from 1000 to 64K
Check the plan then; AFAIR the only possible effect of changing
effective_cache_size is to influence which plan the planner picks.
Dear Tom,
the problem was repeatble in the sense repeated
execution of queries made no difference on
performance.
What lead to degradation was the bumping off of
effective_cache_size parameter from 1000 to 64K
Can any one point me the recent guide done by
Sridhar and Josh i want to see wha
Rajesh Kumar Mallah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Odd. Apparently the planner is picking a better plan in the function
>> context than in the subselect context --- which is strange since it
>> ought to have less information.
> [ verbose plan snipped ]
Well, that sure seems to
Rajesh Kumar Mallah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> explain analyze SELECT company_id , (SELECT edition FROM ONLY
> public.branding_master b WHERE old_company_id = a.company_id OR company_id =
> a.company_id ORDER BY b.company_id DESC LIMIT 1) from public.branding_master
> a limit 50;
> Total ru
