On 09/17/2014 07:56 AM, Alexander Hill wrote:
Hello,
I have a table of tree nodes with a tsquery column. To get a subtree's
tsquery, I need to OR all of its nodes' tsqueries together.
I defined a custom aggregate using tsquery_or:
CREATE AGGREGATE tsquery_or_agg (tsquery)
(
Hi Folk,
I am trying to investigate some performance issues which we have with postgres
(a different topic by itself) and tried postgres.9.4beta2, with a hope that it
perform better.
Turned out that 9.4 is 2x slower than 9.3.5 on the same hardware.
Some technical details:
Host: rhel 6.5 2.
On 18/09/14 21:58, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
Hi Folk,
I am trying to investigate some performance issues which we have with postgres
(a different topic by itself) and tried postgres.9.4beta2, with a hope that it
perform better.
Turned out that 9.4 is 2x slower than 9.3.5 on the same hardware.
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan" ,
> pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 12:17:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On 18/09/14 21:58, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi Folk,
> >
> > I am tr
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>
>
> Hi Folk,
>
> I am trying to investigate some performance issues which we have with
> postgres
> (a different topic by itself) and tried postgres.9.4beta2, with a hope
> that it
> perform better.
>
> Turned out that 9.4 is 2x slower t
- Original Message -
> From: "Jeff Janes"
> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
> Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 4:56:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran > wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hi Fol
On 09/18/2014 08:09 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>>> 9.4beta2:
>>> > >
>> > ...
>> >
>>> > > 0.957854END;
>>> > >
>> >
>> > Looks like IO.
> Postgres internal IO? May be. We get 600MB/s on this SSDs.
While it's possible that this is a Postgres issue, my first thought is
that the
- Original Message -
> From: "Josh Berkus"
> To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 7:54:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On 09/18/2014 08:09 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
> >>> 9.4beta2:
> >>> > >
> >> > ...
> >> >
> >>> > >
On 09/18/2014 03:09 PM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Josh Berkus"
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 7:54:24 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
On 09/18/2014 08:09 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
9.4beta2:
...
On Sep 18, 2014 9:32 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 09/18/2014 03:09 PM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >> From: "Josh Berkus"
> >> To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 7:54:24 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postg
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
wrote:
>
> 9.3.5:
> 0.035940END;
>
>
> 9.4beta2:
> 0.957854END;
time being spent on 'END' is definitely suggesting i/o related issues.
This is making me very skeptical that postgres is the source of the
problem.
On 19/09/14 08:32, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
wrote:
9.3.5:
0.035940END;
9.4beta2:
0.957854END;
time being spent on 'END' is definitely suggesting i/o related issues.
This is making me very skeptical that post
- Original Message -
> From: "Merlin Moncure"
> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
> Cc: "postgres performance list"
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:32:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
> wrote:
> >
> > 9.3.5:
> >
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
> To: "Merlin Moncure" , "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
>
> Cc: "postgres performance list"
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:56:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On 19/09/14 08:32, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 18,
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
>> To: "Merlin Moncure" , "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
>>
>> Cc: "postgres performance list"
>> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:56:36 PM
>> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Mark Kirkwood"
> > To: "Merlin Moncure" , "Tigran Mkrtchyan" <
> tigran.mkrtch...@desy.de>
> > Cc: "postgres performance list"
> > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:56:36 PM
> > Subject:
On 19/09/14 09:10, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Kirkwood"
To: "Merlin Moncure" , "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
Cc: "postgres performance list"
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:56:36 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
On 19/09/14 08:32, Merlin Mon
On 19/09/14 10:16, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
On 19/09/14 09:10, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Kirkwood"
To: "Merlin Moncure" , "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
Cc: "postgres performance list"
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:56:36 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
> Cc: "Merlin Moncure" , "postgres performance list"
>
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 12:49:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On 19/09/14 10:16, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> > On 19/09/14 09:10,
On 19/09/14 17:53, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Kirkwood"
Further to the confusion, here's my 9.3 vs 9.4 on two M550 (one for 9.3
one for 9.4), see below for results.
I'm running xfs on them with trim/discard enabled:
$ mount|grep pg
/dev/sdd4 on /mnt
20 matches
Mail list logo
