Merlin Moncure writes:
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> FWIW, PG >= 9.5 will ignore a LIMIT 1 inside an EXISTS, so that you get
>> the same plan with or without it. But that does act as an optimization
>> fence in earlier releases.
> Does 'offset 0' still work as it did?
On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 02:27:59PM -0800, Tory M Blue wrote:
> If my data is located in /data
>
> and I link to a new dir in /data1, what actually happens. do I end up with
> 2 file systems and links and thus am not able to delete or cleanup any old
> data, or how does this work?
>
> Also will t
Howdy
Postgres9.2 going to 9.4
CentOS 6.5
So in most of my environments, I use slony and thus use slony replication
for my upgrades (Drop/add nodes etc).
But I've got a pretty big DB just shy of a TB that is on a single node. A
dump restore would take over 48 hours because of index creations et
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> FWIW, PG >= 9.5 will ignore a LIMIT 1 inside an EXISTS, so that you get
> the same plan with or without it. But that does act as an optimization
> fence in earlier releases.
Does 'offset 0' still work as it did?
merlin
--
Sent via pgsql-per
Le 2 mars 2016 16:25:10 GMT+01:00, Artem Tomyuk a écrit :
>Hi.
>
>I've noticed that autovac. process worked more than 10 minutes, during
>this
>zabbix logged more than 90% IO disk utilization on db volume
>
>===>29237 2016-03-02 15:17:23 EET 0 [24-1]LOG:
>automatic vacuum of ta
