s of data,
then PostgreSQL will not perform as well as SQL server. SQL server
can divide processing load of complicated queries across several
processor, while PostgreSQL cannot.
So, I guess it depends upon your workload.
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing li
never
opened a transaction to begin with.
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
only UNIQUE, PRIMARY KEY,
EXCLUDE, and REFERENCES (foreign key) constraints accept this clause.
NOT NULL and CHECK constraints are not deferrable.
It looks like the check isn't preformed until COMMIT.
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 7:51 AM, Mladen Gogala
wrote:
> Yyesss! Any time frame on that? Can you make it into 9.0.2?
Maybe 9.1.0 or 9.2.0 :) 9.0's features are already frozen.
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
http://pugs.postgr
ate on concurrency write
> transaction.
Regarding the update conflict, what aspect of it did you want to talk
about? Also, so that others (having much more experience that I do)
can participate in this discussion please reply-all to the email.
This will ensure that the pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
On Feb 1, 2010, at 8:57 PM, wyx6...@sina.com wrote:
i found a joke ,maybe this joke concurrency strategy is the
designer's pround idea, but i think it is a joke , next let me
describe the problems:
I would suggest that the behavior that you dislike so much is really
not idea of the postg
uld wager that this response is a tad flame-bait-"ish".
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
ed to JOINs especially), I'd be most grateful.
PostgreSQL inheritance is just a sugar coated form of horizontal table
partitioning. So it suffers from all of the problems associated with
selection on UNION ALL queries.
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
Visit the Los Angeles PostgreS
ith CASE statements is
better suited to the COALESCE(...) function.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/functions-conditional.html#AEN14484
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug
--
Sent via pgsql-performanc
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Richard Broersma
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SELECT A."dimension_book"."call", SUM( B."dimension_book"."call" ) AS
> OrderedRowNbr
> FROM ( your_above_query_without_the_limits ) AS A
> INNER JOIN ( your_ab
a
couple of ways to improve performance.
SELECT A."dimension_book"."call", SUM( B."dimension_book"."call" ) AS
OrderedRowNbr
FROM ( your_above_query_without_the_limits ) AS A
INNER JOIN ( your_above_query_without_the_limits ) AS B
ON A."dimension_book
ll the last 10th
value from the previous query. Then remove the offset predicate and
replace it with the following WHERE clause:
WHERE ...
AND dimension_book.call > _last_queried_10th_row-dimension_book_call,
...
LIMIT 10;
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL
eater than four
team members and produce an ordered list displaying the ranking for
each team according to their average time.
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
Visit the Los Angles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsq
This is a RANGE query (just like BETWEEN) which is index-friendly.
Another option would be to create a functional index on date_trunc(
'day', cdr.calldate)
then using a where condition like:
date_trunc(a.calldate) = '2008-04-09'
would definitely use an index.
--
Regards
--- Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (perhaps a
> pastebin like http://pgsql.privatepaste.com) instead of or in addition
> to sending it in the email.
It this new? I don't remember seeing this used before.
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
ld have.
(3) And this probably will not change soon since the OLE DB driver is not
actively supported.
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose a
atic/sql-vacuum.html
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/sql-analyze.html
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/routine-vacuuming.html
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
'AY8510439' -- where the last digit is
^ ^ -- lowest AND highest
expected value
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMA
functions-admin.html#FUNCTIONS-ADMIN-DBSIZE
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
a
science, since most recommendations boil down to experiences based on trial and
error.
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
since some of the
most affective parameters are non-run-time tune-able.
In regards to query planning, I wonder if there is way to model a controller
that could
adjust/alter query plans based on a comparison of expected and actual query
execution times.
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
es to tune kernel parameters to maximized
usage of system
resources and at the same time allow for harmonious sharing between various
programs/services.
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
so shmall may need to be adjusted also.
> The total RAM available on this machine is 512MB.
>
> I am not sure how to set these parameters SHMMAX and SHMMIN.
> Any help/advice would be greatly appreciated.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/kernel-resources.html
> >This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification.
> >Delivery to the following recipients failed.
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
yes, I got the same thing that you did here. only i got when I replied all to
your email. Are you
sure this individual wasn't listed in any of y
27;s up? This seems to
> be a new
> phenomenon. Should the [EMAIL PROTECTED] be getting these and discarding
> them?
>
> Thanks,
> Craig
Does the message come from postgresql.org or is the bounced email coming from
these specific users
when you include them in reply-all?
Regards,
Ri
emory
and reduces that time it takes to scan the index.
Thats how I understand it.
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
here are additional limitations beyond these I would be interested in
knowing about them and
adding them to the http://www.postgresql.org/about/ we be helpful also.
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked o
> > raid 10 is of course not questionable. but are you sure that it will
> > work faster than for example:
> > 2 discs (raid 1) for xlog
> > 6 discs (raid 10) for tables
> > 6 discs (raid 10) for indices?
> >
>
> This depends on your application. Do you have a lot of disc reads?
> Anyhow, I woul
> I'd like to get more info on EXPLAIN ANALYZE output... where can I read more
> about it?
I believe this link has what you are looking for:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/performance-tips.html
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
---(end o
29 matches
Mail list logo
