I just compiled it with gcc and produces the gmon.out file for every
process; by the way I am running below script in order to produce
readable .out files
gprof .../pgsql/bin/postgres gmon.out > createtable2.out
is postgres the right executable?
regards
reydan
On Sep 7, 2009, at 8:24 PM,
I just compiled it with gcc and produces the gmon.out file for every
process; by the way I am running below script in order to produce
readable .out files
gprof .../pgsql/bin/postgres gmon.out > createtable2.out
is postgres the right executable?
regards
reydan
On Sep 7, 2009, at 8:24
I just compiled it with gcc and produces the gmon.out file for every
process; by the way I am running below script in order to produce
readable .out files
gprof .../pgsql/bin/postgres gmon.out > createtable2.out
is postgres the right executable?
regards
reydan
Off topic, but hac
Pierre Frédéric Caillaud wrote:
I just compiled it with gcc and produces the gmon.out file for every
process; by the way I am running below script in order to produce
readable .out files
gprof .../pgsql/bin/postgres gmon.out > createtable2.out
is postgres the right executable?
regards
reyd
Hello,
I have a following query (autogenerated by Django)
SELECT activity_activityevent.id, activity_activityevent.user_id,
activity_activityevent.added_on
FROM activity_activityevent
WHERE activity_activityevent.user_id IN (
SELECT U0.user_id
FROM profile U0
INNER JOIN profile_frien
Learn it to not generate with "WITH IN (subq)", is this can be quite
slow on postgresql. Use joins instead.
looks like planner was wrong about rowcount in one place: Hash IN Join
(cost=2204.80..4809.31 rows=292 width=202) (actual
time=12.856..283.916 rows=15702 loops=1)
I have no idea why, proba
Eugene Morozov wrote:
> Can anyone enlighten me? Should I set random_page_cost to 1.2
> permanently (I feel this is not a really good idea in my case)?
For it to pass as many rows as it did in the time that it did, most or
all of the "reads" were cached. If this is typically the case, at
lea
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Eugene Morozov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a following query (autogenerated by Django)
>
> SELECT activity_activityevent.id, activity_activityevent.user_id,
> activity_activityevent.added_on
> FROM activity_activityevent
> WHERE activity_activityevent.user_id IN (
>
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 10:30:21AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> Folks,
>
> For those of you who can't attend in person, we'll be streaming audio
> and video and having a chat for tonight's SFPUG meeting on how the
> planner uses statistics.
>
> Video:
>
> http://media.postgresql.org/sfpug/stream
Folks,
For those of you who can't attend in person, we'll be streaming audio
and video and having a chat for tonight's SFPUG meeting on how the
planner uses statistics.
Video:
http://media.postgresql.org/sfpug/streaming
Chat:
irc://irc.freenode.net/sfpug
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter http:
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 10:32:53AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 10:30:21AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > For those of you who can't attend in person, we'll be streaming audio
> > and video and having a chat for tonight's SFPUG meeting on how the
> > planner
Hi all I have a large table (>2billion rows) that's partitioned by date based
on an epoch int value. We're running a select max(id) where id is the PK. I
have a PK index on each of the partitions, no indexes at all on the base
table.
If I hit a partition table directly I get an index scan as e
Scott Marlowe writes:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Eugene Morozov wrote:
> OK, you need to look a little deeper at what's happening here. The
> pgsql query planner looks at a lot of things to decide if to use seq
> scan or and index. If you look at your row estimates versus actual
> rows r
13 matches
Mail list logo
