On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 9:17 PM, acanada wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thankyou for your answer.
> I have made more changes than a simple re-indexing recently. I have moved
> the sorting field to the table in order to avoid the join clause. Now the
> schema is very simple. The query only implies one table:
0..3461.23 rows=159104 width=0) (actual
> time=35.174..35.174rows=138165 loops=1)
>Index Cond: ((name)::text = 'progesterone'::text)
> Total runtime: 95811.838 ms
> (8 rows)
>
> Any ideas please?
>
> Thank you
> Andrés.
>
>
>
> El Mar
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 3:30 AM, acanada wrote:
> Hello Evgeniy!
>
> I can move the database to another server...
> This is the cat of /proc/cpuinfo. Does it have enough power or should I go
> for a better one??
>
> (It has 32 processors like this one):
>
> cat /proc/cpuinfo
> processor : 0
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 10:09 PM, acanada wrote:
Hello,
>
> First of all I'd like to thank all of you for taking your time and help me
> with this. Thank you very much.
>
> I did migrate the database to the new server with 32 processors Intel(R)
> Xeon(R) CPU E5-2670 0 @ 2.60GHz and 60GB of RAM.
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:17 PM, acanada wrote:
> Hello,
>
> New server postgres version is 9.3. I'm not sure if I collected latest
> statistics after migration, if you mean if the current_settings or analyze
> queries that I posted were collected after migration... yes (notice that
> there are a
