On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:31 PM electrotype wrote:
> Agreed.
>
>
> However, this isn't really the purview of JDBC - I'm doubting it does
> anything that would cause the order to be different than what is received,
> and the batch items are sent and results processed sequentially.
>
> The main ques
On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 8:31 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> What you might try is defining the statistics with only the functional
> dependencies. That should consider the column-level correlation even
> when the combination of values is not in the MCV. It might make the
> "good" estimate worse, but tha
--
Dirk Mika
Software Developer
mika:timing GmbH
Strundepark - Kürtener Str. 11b
51465 Bergisch Gladbach
Germany
fon +49 2202 2401-1197
dirk.m...@mikatiming.de
www.mikatiming.de
AG Köln HRB 47509 * WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE 90029884
Geschäftsführer: Harald Mika, Jörg Mika
Am 06.12.20, 06:15 schrieb
It has been 4 hours and it is safe to say that the measurements we took
have a huge positive effect: > 30 times faster and no noticeable effect on
the running Primary at all.
A 20GB table is now replicated under 10 minutes.
- We removed all non PK and unique indices from the large tables
- We the
Hi,
- on the receiving side, avoid creating indexes on the tables: create just
> a necessary PK or UK, wait for the initial load to complete and then add
> all the rest ones
>
Thanks, this is a good tip. We are going to add this
We also noticed the code that was getting the next from the "queue"
