On 14 Jul 2003 at 12:51, Nick Fankhauser wrote:
> Any thoughts? Is this a sane plan? Are there other parameters I should
> consider changing first?
Well, everything seems to be in order and nothing much to suggest I guess. But
still..
1. 30 users does not seem to be much of a oevrhead. If possib
I said:
> I am not sure why the planner did not choose to stick a Materialize
> node atop the Subquery Scan, though. It looks to me like it should
> have considered that option --- possibly the undercharging for Subquery
> Scan is the reason it wasn't chosen.
Indeed, after fixing the unrealistic
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> However, it looks to me like the subquery-scan-outside plan probably
>> is the faster one, on both my machine and yours. I get
> Woah, that's pretty whacky. It seems like it ought to be way faster to do a
> single se
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You seem to be using a rather wacko value of cpu_tuple_cost; those
> Result nodes ought to be costed at 0.01 not 1.00. With the default
oops yes, thanks. that was left over from other experimentation.
> However, it looks to me like the subquery-scan-outsi
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> slo=> explain analyze select * from region, (select 1 union all select 2) as x;
>QUERY PLAN
>
> --
> I still would like some guidance on tunning FreeBSD (shmmax and
> shmmaxpgs).
> Do I need to even touch these settings?
Stephen- I have no idea what these are set to by default in FreeBSD, but
here's the page that covers changing it in the postgresql docs:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/st
Hi folks-
For some time, we've been running Postgres with the default configuration &
getting adequate performance, but the time has come to tune a bit, so I've
been lurking on this list & gathering notes. Now I'm about ready to make a
change & would appreciate it if a few more experienced folks c
Richard-
That was very helpfull Thanks!
I still would like some guidance on tunning FreeBSD (shmmax and shmmaxpgs).
Do I need to even touch these settings?
Stephen Howie
>There are two articles recently posted here:
>
>http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/
>
>They should provide a good start.
>--
I think you want to use a Cursor for browsing the data.
Christoph Nelles
Am Montag, 14. Juli 2003 um 18:53 schrieben Sie:
RC> Greetings,
RC> We have several tables (in a PG 7.3.3 database on RH Linux 7.3) with 2M+
RC> rows (each row 300-400 bytes in length) that we SELECT into a JDBC
RC> Resu
Greetings,
We have several tables (in a PG 7.3.3 database on RH Linux 7.3) with 2M+
rows (each row 300-400 bytes in length) that we SELECT into a JDBC
ResultSet for display to the user. We expected that the driver would not
actually transmit data from the database until the application began
is
On Monday 14 Jul 2003 3:31 pm, Stephen Howie wrote:
[snip]
> My problem is that I have not totally put my head around the concepts of
> the shmmax, shmmaxpgs, etc As it pertains to my current setup and the
> shared mem values in postgresql.conf. I'm looking for a good rule of thumb
> when app
Tried to search the list but the search wasn't
working.
I have a server running strictly PostgreSQL that
I'm trying to tune for performance. The specs are
2 X 2.4 Athlon MP processors
2G Reg DDR
FreeBSD 4.8 SMP kernel complied
PostgreSQL 7.3.3
4 X 80G IDE Raid 5
My problem is that I have
On 13/07/2003 20:51 Balazs Wellisch wrote:
[snip]
> > So, does anyone here have any experience using RH AS and DB 2.1?
>
> Are RH still selling DB 2.1? I can't find it listed on their web site.
> --
Yes, it's available for free download. The documentation is here:
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manual
On Sun, 2003-07-13 at 14:50, Steve Wampler wrote:
> I've got a simple nested query:
>
> select * from attributes where id in (select id from
> attributes where (name='obsid') and (value='oid00066'));
>
> that performs abysmally. I've heard this described as the
> 'classic WHERE IN' proble
On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 12:51:02PM -0700, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
>
> Unfortunatelly, compiling from source is not really an option for us. We use
> RPMs only to ease the installation and upgrade process. We have over a
> hundred servers to maintaine and having to compile and recompile software
> e
On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 12:42:29PM -0700, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> > On Sun, 2003-07-13 at 01:35, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> > Note that I've read a couple of times from Tom Lane (one of the
> > core team) that FKs are a serous performance drag, so I'd drop
> > them after the s/w has been in product
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 11:25:14AM -0700, Nikolaus Dilger wrote:
> Alexandre,
>
> Since you want the fastest speed I would do the 2 data
> disks in RAID 0 (striping) not RAID 1 (mirroring).
Note that RAID 0 buys you nothing at all in redundancy. So if the
point is to be able to recover from a di
17 matches
Mail list logo
