Re: [PERFORM] Delete performance again

2008-10-02 Thread Віталій Тимчишин
2008/10/2 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > "=?ISO-8859-5?B?svbi0Nv22SDC2Nzn2OjY3Q==?=" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > delete from company where id not in (select company_id from > company_descr); > > I've tried to analyze command, but unlike to other RDBM I've used it did > not > > include cascade

Re: [PERFORM] dedicated server & postgresql 8.1 conf tunning

2008-10-02 Thread paul
I played with work_mem and setting work_mem more than 256000 do not change the performance. I try to upgrade to 8.3 using etch-backports but it's a new install not an upgrade. So i have to create users, permissions, import data again, it scared me so i want to find another solutions first. But now

Re: [PERFORM] Delete performance again

2008-10-02 Thread Tom Lane
"=?ISO-8859-5?B?svbi0Nv22SDC2Nzn2OjY3Q==?=" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > delete from company where id not in (select company_id from company_descr); > I've tried to analyze command, but unlike to other RDBM I've used it did not > include cascade deletes/checks into query plan. That is first proble

[PERFORM] Delete performance again

2008-10-02 Thread Віталій Тимчишин
Hello. I have a database with company table that have a bunch of related (delete=cascade) tables. Also it has 1<->M relation to company_descr table. Once we've found that ~half of our companies do not have any description and we would like to remove them. First this I've tried was delete from comp

Re: [PERFORM] dedicated server & postgresql 8.1 conf tunning

2008-10-02 Thread Richard Huxton
Tommy Gildseth wrote: > Richard Huxton wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Unfornatly, i can't update pgsql to 8.3 since it's not in debian stable. >> >> That's why backports.org was invented :-) >> Or does can't mean "not allowed to"? > > Well, running production servers from b

Re: [PERFORM] dedicated server & postgresql 8.1 conf tunning

2008-10-02 Thread Tommy Gildseth
Richard Huxton wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, Unfornatly, i can't update pgsql to 8.3 since it's not in debian stable. That's why backports.org was invented :-) Or does can't mean "not allowed to"? Well, running production servers from backports can be a risky proposition too, an

Re: [PERFORM] dedicated server & postgresql 8.1 conf tunning

2008-10-02 Thread Richard Huxton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Thanks, > > Unfornatly, i can't update pgsql to 8.3 since it's not in debian stable. That's why backports.org was invented :-) Or does can't mean "not allowed to"? > So i'm going to play with work_mem & shared_buffers. > > With big shared_buffers pgsql tells me > shm

Re: [PERFORM] dedicated server & postgresql 8.1 conf tunning

2008-10-02 Thread paul
Thanks, Unfornatly, i can't update pgsql to 8.3 since it's not in debian stable. So i'm going to play with work_mem & shared_buffers. With big shared_buffers pgsql tells me shmget(cle=5432001, taille=11183431680, 03600). so i do "echo 13183431680 > /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax" ( 10Go + 2Go just in

Re: [PERFORM] bizarre query performance question

2008-10-02 Thread Richard Huxton
H. William Connors II wrote: > fa_assignment has 44184945 records > fa_assignment_detail has 82196027 records > > explain select * from fa_assignment fa JOIN fa_assignment_detail fad ON > (fad.assignment_id = fa.assignment_id) where fa.scenario_id = 0; > >