On 11/3/07, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jeff Larsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > My case probably fits the 'special case' description. Not all the
> > columns in each subquery matched up, so there were NULL::text
> > placeholders in some spots in the SELECT. In the case where
> > performance got bad, on
Hello all,
What are the ideal settings for values in this postgresql.conf file??? I
have tried so many parameter changes but I still can not get the 8.1.4
version to perform as well as the 7.x version...what do others have their
postgrsql.conf file values set to???
Are there any known performan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> PostgreSQL doesn't support Common Table Expressions - you can write
> SRF function:
>
> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION c(integer)
> RETURNS SETOF something AS $$
> DECLARE r RECORD;
> o something;
> BEGIN
> FOR r IN SELECT * FROM
On 11/4/07, smiley2211 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> What are the ideal settings for values in this postgresql.conf file??? I
> have tried so many parameter changes but I still can not get the 8.1.4
> version to perform as well as the 7.x version...what do others have their
> postg
Scott,
Thanks for responding...I've posted all that information before and tried
all the suggestions but the query is still taking over 1 hour to complete
:(...I just wanted to possible hear what others have say 'effective cache',
'shared_buffers' etc set to...
Thanks...Marsha
Scott Marlowe-2
smiley2211 wrote:
What are the ideal settings for values in this postgresql.conf file??? I
have tried so many parameter changes but I still can not get the 8.1.4
version to perform as well as the 7.x version...what do others have their
postgrsql.conf file values set to???
Are there any known pe
For those of you considering a move to the upcoming 8.3 release, now in
beta, I've written some documentation on the changes made in checkpoint
and background writer configuration in the new version:
http://www.westnet.com/~gsmith/content/postgresql/chkp-bgw-83.htm
Since the first half of that
On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 07:33:46PM -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
> On the topic of performance improvements in 8.3, I don't think this list
> has been getting information about the concurrent sequential scans
> improvements. Check out these documents for more about that:
>
> http://j-davis.com/postgr
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
I'm a bit puzzled by this part, though: "All tests are on linux with the
anticipatory I/O scheduler. The default I/O scheduler for Linux is CFQ
(Completely Fair Queue), which does not work well for PostgreSQL in my
tests."
The syncronized scan
Gregory Stark wrote:
cdbpathlocus_pull_above_projection
In particular this is the function I was hoping to see. Anyways as Tom pointed
out previously there's precedent in Postgres as well for subqueries so I'm
sure I'll be able to do it.
(But I'm still not entirely convinced putting the app
10 matches
Mail list logo
