Re: [PERFORM] Configuring for maximum memory usage

Hi, you could set effective_cache_size to a high value (free memory on your server that is used for caching). Christiaan Willemsen wrote: Hi there, I configured OpenSolaris on our OpenSolaris Machine. Specs: 2x Quad 2.6 Ghz Xeon 64 GB of memory 16x 15k5 SAS The filesystem is configured using

Re: [PERFORM] More shared_buffers instead of effective_cache_size?

Scott Marlowe wrote: On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Ulrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I wouldn't set shared_buffers that high just because things like vacuum and sorts need memory too Okay, I understand that vacuum uses memory, but I thought sorts are done in work_mem

Re: [PERFORM] More shared_buffers instead of effective_cache_size?

f one query which will never return more than 500 rows. -Ulrich -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

[PERFORM] More shared_buffers instead of effective_cache_size?

94 seconds, 30.1 MB/s That is really really slow (10 times slower than on my other machine). What would you do now? Increasing shared_buffers to 100MB and setting effective_cache_size to 0MB? Or increasing effective_cache_size, too? Thanks for help. Regards, -Ulrich -- Sent via pgsql-performan

Re: [PERFORM] Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster?

nly running a very small server with 256MB RAM and the webserver also likes to use some RAM. Does Postgre cache the HASH-Table for later use? For example when the user reloads the website. Kind regards Ulrich Rusty Conover wrote: This is what I've found with tables ranging in the million

Re: [PERFORM] Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster?

rows=12 loops=1) If I set Offset to "3" and LIMIT=10 it is Sort (cost=113.73..113.75 rows=8 width=5) (actual time=0.321..0.328 rows=13 loops=1) It looks like if this "row" is something like min(max_rows=13, LIMIT+OFFSET). But I do not completely understand the Synt

Re: [PERFORM] Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster?

me result, so I will use #1 and count(*) takes just 0.478ms if I use query #1. Kind Regards, Ulrich Tom Lane wrote: Ulrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: People say that [EXISTS is faster] People who say that are not reliable authorities, at least as far as Postgres is concerned.

[PERFORM] Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster?

SELECT speed" with "SELECT count(*)" and remove the LIMIT and OFFSET. Is this good? I have read that count(*) is slow. Kind regards Ulrich -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

Re: [PERFORM] Large objetcs performance

ase now is 12Gb, but searching with the web interface has a maximum of 5 seconds (most searches are faster). The one disadvantage is the backup (I use pg_dump once a week which needs about 10 hours). But for now, this is acceptable for me. But I want to look at slony or port everything to a linux machine. Ulrich

Re: [PERFORM] Large objetcs performance

ase now is 12Gb, but searching with the web interface has a maximum of 5 seconds (most searches are faster). The one disadvantage is the backup (I use pg_dump once a week which needs about 10 hours). But for now, this is acceptable for me. But I want to look at slony or po

[PERFORM] query planner: automatic rescribe of LIKE to BETWEEN ?

Hello all, had an idea of optimizing a query that may work generally. In case a 'column' is indexed, following two alterations could be done I think: A) select ... where column ~ '^Foo' --> Seq Scan into that: select ... where column BETWEEN 'Foo' AND 'FooZ' --> Index Scan of co

Re: [PERFORM] How to determine cause of performance problem?

ster to me. /Ulrich ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match

Re: [PERFORM] Need for speed 3

gram which executes advanced query interface call to the server. How would that improve performance? Ulrich ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

[PERFORM] Need for speed 3

re there better ways to do it? Is there some literature you recommend reading? TIA Ulrich ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

[PERFORM] Need for speed 2

nswer. But all other queries with less data (at the same time) still have to be fast. I can not stop users doing that kind of reporting. :( I need more speed in orders of magnitude. Will more disks / more memory do that trick? Money is of course a limiting factor but it doesn't have

Re: [PERFORM] Need for speed

lease find postgresql.conf below. Ulrich #--- # RESOURCE USAGE (except WAL) #--- # - Memory - shared_buffers = 2 # min 16, at least max_con

[PERFORM] Need for speed

some orders of magnitude. I already thought of a box with the whole database on a ram disc. So really any idea is welcome. Ulrich -- Ulrich Wisser / System Developer RELEVANT TRAFFIC SWEDEN AB, Riddarg 17A, SE-114 57 Sthlm, Sweden Direct (+46)86789755 || Cell (+46)704467893 || Fax (+46

Re: [PERFORM] Query tuning help

m.entrydate >= '2005-1-1 00:00'::date and em.entrydate <= '2005-5-9 00:00'::date and ( recordtext like '%RED%' or recordtext like '%CORVETTE%' ) order by em.entrydate That should give you all rows containing one of the words. Does it work? Is is fa

Re: [PERFORM] insert

Hi, my inserts are done in one transaction, but due to some foreign key constraints and five indexes sometimes the 100 inserts will take more than 5 minutes. /Ulrich ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives

[PERFORM] insert

Hi, is there anything I can doo to speed up inserts? One of my tables gets about 100 new rows every five minutes. And somehow the inserts tend to take more and more time. Any suggestions welcome. TIA Ulrich ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the

Re: [PERFORM] [GENERAL] How to know which queries are to be optimised?

se to see why they are long running. But is there a tool that could compile a summary out of the log? The log grows awefully big after a short time. Thanks /Ulrich ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index