"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just as a side note, just doing a straight scan for the records, with no
> SUM()/GROUP BY involved, with the month_trunc() index is still >8k msec:
Well so the problem isn't the query at all, you just have too much data to
massage online. You can
One thing I learned after spending about a week comparing the Athlon (2
ghz, 333 mhz frontside bus) and Xeon (2.4 ghz, 266 mhz frontside bus)
platforms was that on average the select queries I was benchmarking ran
30% faster on the Athlon (this was with data cached in memory so may not
apply to the
we are looking at Xeon, We are currently running it on a quad sun v880
compiled to be 64bit and have been getting dreadful performance. I don't
think we really have much to gain from going 64bit.
- Original Message -
From: "Ron Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "PgSQL Performance ML" <[E
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 17:32, Chris Field wrote:
> We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
> the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
> how postgres in not a threaded application, and this server will only be
> used for log/transaction ana
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 18:32, Chris Field wrote:
>> > We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
>> > the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
>> > how postgres in not a threaded application, and
On 2003-11-11T17:40:14-0700, scott.marlowe wrote:
> 2 CPUs should be plenty.
for everyone? No, I must have been thinking of someone else :-)
/Allan
--
Allan Wind
P.O. Box 2022
Woburn, MA 01888-0022
USA
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Rod Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 18:32, Chris Field wrote:
> > We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
> > the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
> > how postgres in not a threaded application, and this se
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 18:32, Chris Field wrote:
> We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
> the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
> how postgres in not a threaded application, and this server will only be
> used for log/transaction ana
Dear Gurus,
We are planning to add more db server hardware for the apps. The
question is, what makes more sense regarding
performance/scalability/price of the hardware...
There are a couple of apps, currently on a dual-cpu Dell server. The
usage of the apps is going to increase quite a lot, and c
We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
how postgres in not a threaded application, and this server will only be
used for log/transaction analysis (it will only ever have a few large
queries runnin
On 11 Nov 2003, Greg Stark wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Greg Stark wrote:
> >
> > > Actually you might be able to get the same effect using function indexes
> > > like:
> > >
> > > create index i on traffic_log (month_trunc(runtime), company_
RC2 is running in production without any apparent problems
till now. Well its difficult to say at the moment how much speed
gain is there unless the heavy duty batch SQL scripts are run by
cron.
Count(*) and group by on large tables are significantly (5x) faster
and better error reporting
Josh Berkus wrote:
Rajesh, Chris,
I got the osdb benchmark running last week, and had to separate client
from server. I had to jump through a fair number of hoops including
copying data files over to the server. The benchmark software needs a
bit more work...
What abo
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Greg Stark wrote:
>
> > Actually you might be able to get the same effect using function indexes
> > like:
> >
> > create index i on traffic_log (month_trunc(runtime), company_id)
>
> had actually thought of that one ... is it
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> >
> > explain analyze SELECT ts.company_id, company_name, SUM(ts.bytes) AS total_traffic
> > FROM company c, traffic_logs ts
> >WHERE c.company_id = ts.company_id
> > AND month_trunc(ts.r
marc,
> had actually thought of that one ... is it something that is only
> available in v7.4?
Yes. New feature.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Rajesh, Chris,
> I got the osdb benchmark running last week, and had to separate client
> from server. I had to jump through a fair number of hoops including
> copying data files over to the server. The benchmark software needs a
> bit more work...
What about the OSDL's TPC-derivative benchmark
After a long battle with technology,[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rajesh Kumar Mallah), an
earthling, wrote:
> the error mentioned in first email has been overcome
> by running osdb on the same machine hosting the DB server.
Yes, it seems unrealistic to try to run the "client" on a separate
host from the da
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Greg Stark wrote:
> Actually you might be able to get the same effect using function indexes
> like:
>
> create index i on traffic_log (month_trunc(runtime), company_id)
had actually thought of that one ... is it something that is only
available in v7.4?
ams=# create index
Dennis Bjorklund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> >
> > explain analyze SELECT ts.company_id, company_name, SUM(ts.bytes) AS total_traffic
> > FROM company c, traffic_logs ts
> >WHERE c.company_id = ts.company_id
> > AND month_trunc(ts.
the error mentioned in first email has been overcome
by running osdb on the same machine hosting the DB server.
regds
mallah.
Rajesh Kumar Mallah wrote:
Hi,
I plan to put 7.4-RC2 in our production servers in next few hours.
Since the hardware config & the performance related GUCs parameter
ar
Hi,
I plan to put 7.4-RC2 in our production servers in next few hours.
Since the hardware config & the performance related GUCs parameter
are going to remain the same i am interested in seeing the performance
improvements in 7.4 as compared 7.3 .
For this i plan to use the OSDB 0.14 and compar
22 matches
Mail list logo
