Hai,
Can anyone tell me the difference and performance between pgdump and
pg_basebackup if I want to backup a large database.
Thanks
Sure. It's all just code. It's not particularly a question of efficiency,
I'm sure it could be made equally efficient. But "simpler" code-wise would
be not having two implementations, or not having one that is designed to
try to keep up with spike demands. The question for this group was really
On 25/03/14 13:23, Brett Wooldridge wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Gavin Flower
mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>>
wrote:
Surely no code changes are required, as one can simply set the
min and max pool sizes to be the same?
Cheers,
Gavin
To be sure it can be im
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Gavin Flower wrote:
> Surely no code changes are required, as one can simply set the min and
> max pool sizes to be the same?
>
> Cheers,
> Gavin
>
To be sure it can be implemented that way, but its a question of design
targets. For example, if a pool is allowe
On 25/03/14 02:27, Brett Wooldridge wrote:
Hi, Brett Wooldridge here, one of the principals of HikariCP. I
thought I'd wade into the conversation pool a little myself if you
guys don't mind.
Speaking to David's point...
>> Reaching the maxPoolSize from the minPoolSize means creating the
>> co
Hi Ilya-
Thanks so much for taking a stab at optimizing that query. I had to fiddle
a bit with your proposed version in order to get it function. Here's what I
came up with in the end:
with RECURSIVE qq(cont_key, anc_key) AS
> (
> SELECT
> a1.context_key, ancestor_key
> FROM
>
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 12:08 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 03/22/2014 02:59 AM, Erik van Zijst wrote:
>>
>> Is there any way I can get postgres to perform the hash calculations
>> on the *result* of the other parts of the where clause, instead of the
>> other way around? Or else rewrite the
Hi, Brett Wooldridge here, one of the principals of HikariCP. I thought
I'd wade into the conversation pool a little myself if you guys don't mind.
Speaking to David's point...
>> Reaching the maxPoolSize from the minPoolSize means creating the
>> connections at the crucial moment where the clien
On 03/22/2014 02:59 AM, Erik van Zijst wrote:
Is there any way I can get postgres to perform the hash calculations
on the *result* of the other parts of the where clause, instead of the
other way around? Or else rewrite the query?
The planner doesn't know that the crypt function is expensive. T
