Frankly put, i didn't know that this perspective exists and then thanks for
putting it that way then !!
Guess I should take a relook at how I plan to use those VIEWS.
Thanks
*Robins*
> A rule of thumb is that ORDER BY in a view is bad design, IMHO.
>
>regards, tom lane
>
Hi,
I am in the process of setting up a postgresql server with 12 SAS disks.
I am considering two options:
1) set up a 12 disks raid 10 array to get maximum raw performance from
the system and put everything on it (it the whole pg cluster, including
WAL, and every tablespcace)
2) set up 3 raid
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 5:51 AM, Franck Routier
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am in the process of setting up a postgresql server with 12 SAS disks.
>
> I am considering two options:
>
> 1) set up a 12 disks raid 10 array to get maximum raw performance from
> the system and put everyth
Hi,
my Raid controller is an Adaptec 31205 SAS/RAID controller. The battery
was an option, but I didn't know it at purchase time. So I have no
battery, but the whole system is on an UPS.
I have done quite a few tests using bonnie++, focusing on 'random seek'
results, and found out that:
1) linux
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Franck Routier wrote:
my Raid controller is an Adaptec 31205 SAS/RAID controller. The battery
was an option, but I didn't know it at purchase time. So I have no
battery, but the whole system is on an UPS.
The UPS is of no help here. The problem is that PostgreSQL forces t
Franck Routier wrote:
Hi,
I am in the process of setting up a postgresql server with 12 SAS disks.
I am considering two options:
1) set up a 12 disks raid 10 array to get maximum raw performance from
the system and put everything on it (it the whole pg cluster, including
WAL, and every table
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:17:29 -0500
"Jignesh K. Shah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Franck Routier wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am in the process of setting up a postgresql server with 12 SAS
> > disks.
> >
> > I am considering two options:
> >
> > 1)
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
/data1 - RAID 10 journalled filesystem + 1 (so 9 disks)
/xlogs - RAID 1 non journalled filesystem + 1 (so 3 disks)
Sounds good. Can't they share the hot spare, rather than having two?
However, I would recommend splashing out on the battery for the c
On Feb 29, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Franck Routier wrote:
my Raid controller is an Adaptec 31205 SAS/RAID controller. The
battery
was an option, but I didn't know it at purchase time. So I have no
battery, but the whole system is on an UPS.
Go find one on ebay or google search, and plug it in. Ad
Greg Smith wrote:
The only real downside of md RAID is that if you lose the boot device
it can be tricky to get the system to start again; hardware RAID hides
that little detail from the BIOS. Make sure you simulate a failure of
the primary boot drive and are comfortable with recovering from
I learned a little about pg_trgm here:
http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/pg_trgm/README.pg_trgm
But this seems like it's for finding similarities, not substrings. How can
I use it to speed up t1.col like '%t2.col%'?
Thanks,
Dan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:52:31 -0800
"Dan Kaplan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I learned a little about pg_trgm here:
> http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/pg_trgm/README.pg_trgm
>
> But this seems like it's for finding similarities, not substr
Joshua Drake spake thusly:
> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:52:31 -0800
> "Dan Kaplan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I learned a little about pg_trgm here:
> > http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/pg_trgm/README.pg_trgm
> >
> > But this seems like it's for finding similarities, not substrings.
Greg Smith wrote:
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Franck Routier wrote:
my Raid controller is an Adaptec 31205 SAS/RAID controller. The battery
was an option, but I didn't know it at purchase time. So I have no
battery, but the whole system is on an UPS.
The UPS is of no help here. The problem is that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:30:08 -0700
"Gregory Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joshua Drake spake thusly:
> We used the now deprecated Full Text Indexing (FTI) with some
> handwaving. But that was in PostgreSQL 7.4 and FTI is not in the
> contr
"Dan Kaplan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I learned a little about pg_trgm here:
> http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/pg_trgm/README.pg_trgm
There's also real documentation in the 8.3 release:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/pgtrgm.html
AFAIK pg_trgm hasn't changed much lately,
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Shane Ambler wrote:
It may be the way you have worded this but it makes it sound like the
cache and the battery backup are as one (or that the cache doesn't work
unless you have the battery)...If the raid card has the cache without
the battery you would get the performance
17 matches
Mail list logo
