CARMODA napsal(a):
has anyone here had any good/bad experiences clustering & load balancing
a PostgreSQL server on Redhat (ES)?
We have recently successfully rolled-out a solution consisting of two
PostgreSQL database backends replicated by Slony. The backends are
accessed from a bunch of appli
"Peter Childs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it actually in the sql spec to sort in a distinct
No. PG's code that supports GROUP BY is newer and smarter than the code
that supports DISTINCT, is all. One of the things on the to-do list is
to revise DISTINCT so it can also consider hash-based i
Hi,
has anyone here had any good/bad experiences clustering & load balancing
a PostgreSQL server on Redhat (ES)?
i have two identical servers with plenty of memory plus a nice disc
array. the solution should have both redundancy and performance. BTW:
it's a back end to a web based applicatio
On 20/12/06, Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 11:19:39PM -0800, Brian Herlihy wrote:
> Actually, I think I answered my own question already. But I want to
> confirm - Is the GROUP BY faster because it doesn't have to sort results,
> whereas DISTINCT must pr
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 11:19:39PM -0800, Brian Herlihy wrote:
> Actually, I think I answered my own question already. But I want to
> confirm - Is the GROUP BY faster because it doesn't have to sort results,
> whereas DISTINCT must produce sorted results? This wasn't clear to me from
> the docum
On mið, 2006-12-20 at 05:31 +, ALVARO ARCILA wrote:
>
> HI,
>
> I've looking around the log files of my server and lately they
> indicate that I should consider increase the check_point segments
> because they're beeing reading too often and also recommend increasing
> the max_fsm_pages over
