Re: [PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query

2007-10-29 Thread Scott Marlowe
On 10/29/07, Campbell, Lance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for all of your help. The problem was that the result_entry table > had some constraints that pointed to a third table. When I removed > those constraints the performance was amazing. The update took less > than seven minutes to exe

Re: [PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query

2007-10-29 Thread Campbell, Lance
Gregory Stark Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 9:05 PM To: Joshua D. Drake Cc: Campbell, Lance; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:31:44 -0500 > "Campbel

Re: [PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query

2007-10-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 03:04:47 +0100 Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > O.k. first you might be grinding through your 20 checkpoint segments > > but in reality what I think is happening is you are doing foreign > > key checks against all of it and slowing things down. > > If you're going

Re: [PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query

2007-10-26 Thread Gregory Stark
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:31:44 -0500 > "Campbell, Lance" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I forgot to include an additional parameter I am using in >> Postgresql.conf: >> > > O.k. first, just to get it out of the way (and then I will try and > help).

Re: [PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query

2007-10-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:31:44 -0500 "Campbell, Lance" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I forgot to include an additional parameter I am using in > Postgresql.conf: > O.k. first, just to get it out of the way (and then I will try and help). Please do not top post, it makes replying contextually very

Re: [PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query

2007-10-26 Thread Gregory Stark
"Campbell, Lance" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >QUERY PLAN > > > > > Hash Join (cost=1437.71..1046983.94 rows=17333178 width=32) >Hash Cond: (result_entry.fk_question_id = question_num

Re: [PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query

2007-10-26 Thread Campbell, Lance
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Campbell, Lance Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 3:27 PM To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: [PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query PostgreSql version 8.2.4 Memory = 8 Gig CPUs 1 dual core Zeon running at 3.0

[PERFORM] Suggestions on an update query

2007-10-26 Thread Campbell, Lance
PostgreSql version 8.2.4 Memory = 8 Gig CPUs 1 dual core Zeon running at 3.0 I have a problem with an update query taking over 10 hours in order to run. I rebooted my server. I ran the SQL command "analyze". Could you please help me with any suggestions? I have included the two tables in