Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 09:00 -0800, Luke Lonergan wrote:
Jim,
On 1/30/06 12:25 PM, "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why divide by 2? A good raid controller should be able to send read
requests to both drives out of the mirrored set to fully utilize the
"Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes [offlist]:
> Attached is a pg_dump -c file with only the required rows (none of
> which contain confidential data), and 0.1% of the rows from the larger
> tables. It does show the same pattern of costing and plan choice.
Thanks for the test case. The f
Using a separate lock table is what we've decided to do in this
particular case to serialize #1 and #3. Inserters don't take this lock
and as such will not be stalled.
> -Original Message-
> From: Markus Schaber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 7:44 AM
> To:
Hi, Marc,
Marc Morin wrote:
> 1- long running report is running on view
> 2- continuous inserters into view into a table via a rule
> 3- truncate or rule change occurs, taking an exclusive lock.
> Must wait for #1 to finish.
> 4- new reports and inserters must now wait for
Hi, Michael,
Michael Stone wrote:
>> I have a performance problem and I don't know where is my bottleneck.
>
> [snip]
>
>> Most of the time the idle value is even higher than 60%.
>
> It's generally a fairly safe bet that if you are running slow and your
> cpu is idle, your i/o isn't fast
