On 2013-04-04, Condor wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have one query in my postgresql 9.2.3 that took 137 ms to me executed
> and looking a way
> what I can do to optimize it. I have one table generated numbers from 1
> to 1 000 000 and
> I need to get first free id, meanwhile id's when is taken can be fr
On 2013-04-05 01:54, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Merlin Moncure writes:
problem is that you are looking for needles (valids = 0) in the
haystack. the problem wasn't really the order, but the fact that
you
had to scan an arbitrary amount of rows be
Try an index like:
create index yada on mytable (id) where valids=0;
then
select max(jobid) from mytable where valids=0;
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Condor wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have one query in my postgresql 9.2.3 that took 137 ms to me executed
> and looking a way
> what I can do to o
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Merlin Moncure writes:
>> problem is that you are looking for needles (valids = 0) in the
>> haystack. the problem wasn't really the order, but the fact that you
>> had to scan an arbitrary amount of rows before finding a candidate
>> record. s
Merlin Moncure writes:
> problem is that you are looking for needles (valids = 0) in the
> haystack. the problem wasn't really the order, but the fact that you
> had to scan an arbitrary amount of rows before finding a candidate
> record. so the partial index manages this problem by creating in
On 4/4/2013 2:49 PM, Condor wrote:
Your solution is work, but Im now a little confused. I has a index
CREATE INDEX ON mytable (valids) USING BTREE (valids) and the
query to find valids = 0 tooks 137 ms.
the query can't use that index, and the separate index on id at the same
time, it has to p
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Condor wrote:
>> SELECT jobid FROM mytable WHERE valids = 0 ORDER BY id ASC LIMIT 1;
>>
>> should return in zero time since btree indexes can optimize order by
>> expressions and the partial index will bypass having to wade through
>> the rows you don't want.
>>
>>
On 2013-04-05 00:38, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Condor wrote:
Hello,
I have one query in my postgresql 9.2.3 that took 137 ms to me
executed and
looking a way
what I can do to optimize it. I have one table generated numbers from
1 to 1
000 000 and
I need to get f
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Condor wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have one query in my postgresql 9.2.3 that took 137 ms to me executed and
> looking a way
> what I can do to optimize it. I have one table generated numbers from 1 to 1
> 000 000 and
> I need to get first free id, meanwhile id's when is
Hello,
I have one query in my postgresql 9.2.3 that took 137 ms to me executed
and looking a way
what I can do to optimize it. I have one table generated numbers from 1
to 1 000 000 and
I need to get first free id, meanwhile id's when is taken can be free
(deleted data and id
is free for next
10 matches
Mail list logo