Thanks for the explanation everyone. Now I understand the planner did
not use the index at all because the deleted condition was not specified
in the original query.
I'm always happy to learn more about the database and appreciate the
link to the partial index documentation.
Martha Driscoll
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> I think this is a false test. You don't have an index on
> asset.copy(barcode). See:
Yes, I know. The databases I ran the explain on were using stock(ish)
Evergreen schemas, where the only index on asset.copy (barcode) was
the part
On 04/26/2013 12:32 PM, Galen Charlton wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
Granted if a unique index is required we can use a unique index as well. My
only point was adding a secondary partial index was probably not the way to
go and that adding a generic ind
On 04/26/2013 12:14 PM, Galen Charlton wrote:
And if the evidence of these explains is any guide, although the query
parser has gotten smarter since 8.4, even in 9.1 the query parser
isn't quite smart enough to detect *all* of the variants of asserting
a condition on a boolean column and pick t
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> Granted if a unique index is required we can use a unique index as well. My
> only point was adding a secondary partial index was probably not the way to
> go and that adding a generic index on barcode would service the user better.
On 04/26/2013 12:21 PM, Galen Charlton wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
Dropping the partial index and only relying on asset.copy(barcode):
Dropping the partial index also means dropping the constraint
enforcing the uniqueness of non-deleted item barcode
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> Dropping the partial index and only relying on asset.copy(barcode):
Dropping the partial index also means dropping the constraint
enforcing the uniqueness of non-deleted item barcodes. That's a
pretty important constraint as far as
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
> And deliberately so, because at the time the index was adjusted to be
> duplicative, PostgreSQL (8.4 IIRC?) was not smart enough to know that
> "deleted = FALSE" was the same as "deleted IS FALSE"; and as we were
> often writing ad hoc quer
On 04/26/2013 11:51 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
Before declaring something "wrong" so confidently, you might want to
double-check your assumptions.
Random sample of course:
select id from asset.copy where barcode IN ('2018115739',
'2016960839','35983832','42721126','36881043',
'43051945','48323042
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:43:18AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 04/26/2013 11:17 AM, Galen Charlton wrote:
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Martha Driscoll
> >wrote:
> >>In our database of 3,161,189 copies, cutting out the deleted copies
> >>eliminates only 904 copies.
On 04/26/2013 11:17 AM, Galen Charlton wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Martha Driscoll wrote:
In our database of 3,161,189 copies, cutting out the deleted copies
eliminates only 904 copies. Why does testing for deleted improve searching
so significantly?
The quick answer is t
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Galen Charlton wrote:
> Hi,
> The quick answer is that the asset.copy index on the barcode column
> also includes a clause to limit the index to copies that aren't
> deleted:
This part of the PostgreSQL documentation is worth a read to learn
more about parti
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Martha Driscoll wrote:
> In our database of 3,161,189 copies, cutting out the deleted copies
> eliminates only 904 copies. Why does testing for deleted improve searching
> so significantly?
The quick answer is that the asset.copy index on the barcode column
We are working on a script to query the Evergreen database for
circulation statistics for a given set of copy barcodes. We use Syrup
for course reserves which is a separate database that has the copy
barcodes for each item on reserve.
We were finding the queries very slow, up to 45 seconds to
I'm hoping some of you report experts out there can help me with this
request...
One of our library systems needs a detailed cash report to send to their
accountant, which contains all the transactions and what they were for by
workstation or library (there are 3 branches). They noticed, in the r
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Kathy Lussier wrote:
> On another note, EduSys Inc. also offered to provide the 2.4 community
> demo server. It didn't make sense to have two community servers running the
> same version of Evergreen, so I'm wondering if there's a need for another
> demo serv
Hi all,
I'm just forwarding along this message from David Busby regarding the
availability of a community demo server for 2.4. I just downloaded the
client and logged in, so all seems to be in working order. However, you
will need to add an SSL Exception to connect. Many thanks to David!
On
Hi Chris,
There is no way to do that yet, but there is an outstanding Launchpad
bug related to this issue -
https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1084758. You might want to
click the link the "Does this bug affect you?" link to generate heat on
the bug report.
Kathy
Kathy Lussier
Proje
Title: Sincerely,
I
am wondering if we have the ability to change
the font size settings for the
TPAC window in the staff
client? And, if so, where? I
found some previous discussion on this topic
but not sure if anything
Top of the morning Madam Terlaga.
This was my second Evergreen International Conference and I have to say
it is always worth the trip to see all the "cool kids". It is a great
opportunity to actually meet the people behind aliases and email
addresses. I have never left these conferences empty h
20 matches
Mail list logo
