Hi,
One simple question. For 125 or more checkpoint segments (checkpoint_timeout
is 600 seconds, shared_buffers are at 21760 or 170MB) on a very busy database,
what is more suitable, a separate 6 disk RAID5 volume, or a RAID10 volume?
Databases will be on separate spindles. Disks are 36
7.4 is the pg version BTWgoing to switch to 8 if it's worth it.
Ingrate, n.: A man who bites the hand that feeds him, and then complains
of indigestion.
--
"Don't say yes until I finish talking."
-- Darryl F. Zanuck
--
"Don't say yes until I finish talking."
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 10:25:47AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> SQL 2005 has "MVCC" (they call it something different, of course, but
> that's basicallyi what it is)
Interesting; do they use an overwriting storage manager like Oracle, or
a non-overwriting one like Postgres?
--
Alvaro Herrera
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 16:11:58 -0500, John A Meinel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>the insert is occurring into table 'a' not table 'b'.
>'a' refers to other tables, but these should not be modified.
So your "a" is Alvaro's "b", and one of your referenced tables is
Alvaro's "a". This is further suppor
> Hi,
>
> I have a perfomance issue :
>
> I run PG (8.0.3) and SQLServer2000 on a Windows2000 Server
> (P4 1,5Ghz 512Mo) I have a table (320 rows) and I run
> this single query :
>
> select cod from mytable group by cod
> I have an index on cod (char(4) - 88 different values)
>
> PG = ~ 2
> ["very, very offtopic"]
> Ok. This comparition is just as useless as the other one,
> because it's comparing oranges with apples (It's funny
> anyway). I was just choosing an example in which you can see
> the best of postgresql against 'not so nice' behavior of
> mssql2000 (no service pack,
