t the list
has grown so large that it can't fit into a buffer anymore. For obvious
reasons I can't run an EXPLAIN ANALYZE from a prompt. I vacuum and
reindex the database daily.
I'd prefer not to have to rewrite the code, so any suggestions would be
very welcome.
Kind reg
Hi Guys,
Following Tom Lane's advice I upgraded to 8.2, and that solved all my
problems. :D
Thank you so much for your input, I really appreciate it.
Kind regards
Willo van der Merwe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is
e, be that the list
has grown so large that it can't fit into a buffer anymore. For obvious
reasons I can't run an EXPLAIN ANALYZE from a prompt. I vacuum and
reindex the database daily.
I'd prefer not to have to rewrite the code, so any suggestions would be
very welcome.
Ki
Hi guys,
I'm have the rare opportunity to spec the hardware for a new database
server. It's going to replace an older one, driving a social networking
web application. The current server (a quad opteron with 4Gb of RAM and
80Gb fast SCSI RAID10) is coping with an average load of ranging between
1
Richard Huxton wrote:
Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Hi guys,
I'm have the rare opportunity to spec the hardware for a new database
server. It's going to replace an older one, driving a social networking
web application. The current server (a quad opteron with 4Gb of RAM and
80Gb fast S
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Hi guys,
I'm have the rare opportunity to spec the hardware for a new database
server. It's going to replace an
Florian Weimer wrote:
You need to run "vmstat 10" (for ten-second averages) and report a
couple of lines.
procs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io --system--
cpu
r b swpd free buff cache si sobibo incs us sy
id wa
1 0 61732 47388 27908 343
Decibel! wrote:
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 11:26:46AM +0200, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Hi guys,
I'm have the rare opportunity to spec the hardware for a new database
server. It's going to replace an older one, drivin
978 ms
(3 rows)
4 1/2 seconds for a count(*) ? This seems a bit rough - is there
anything else I can try to optimize my Database? You can imagine that
slightly more complex queries goes out the roof.
Any help appreciated
Regards
Willo van der Merwe
nking that I might have
to up the frequency.
Joshua D. Drake
Any help appreciated
Regards
Willo van der Merwe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On 8/29/06, Willo van der Merwe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
and it has 743321 rows and a explain analyze select count(*) from
property_values;
you have a number of options:
All good ideas and I'll be sure to implement them later.
I am curious why you ne
Rusty Conover wrote:
On Aug 29, 2006, at 7:52 AM, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Hi,
We're running PostgreSQL 8.1.4 on CentOS 4 (Linux version
2.6.9-34.0.1.ELsmp). Hardware specs:
2x AMD Dual-Core Opteron 270 Italy 1Ghz HT 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket 940
4 GB Registered ECC PC3200 DD
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Currently the load looks like this:
Cpu0 : 96.8% us, 1.9% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi, 1.0% si
Cpu1 : 97.8% us, 1.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi, 0.3% si
Cpu2 : 96.8% us, 2.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa,
0.0% hi, 0.3% si
Cpu3
the queries to take?
- Luke
-Original Message-----
From: Willo van der Merwe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 4:35 AM
To: Luke Lonergan
Cc: Merlin Moncure; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] PostgreSQL performance issues
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Alex Hayward wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On 8/29/06, Willo van der Merwe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
and it has 743321 rows and a explain analyze select count(*) from
property_values;
you have a number of o
Dave Cramer wrote:
On 30-Aug-06, at 7:35 AM, Willo van der Merwe wrote:
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Currently the load looks like this:
Cpu0 : 96.8% us, 1.9% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi,
1.0% si
Cpu1 : 97.8% us, 1.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.3
Dave Dutcher wrote:
That's an interesting situation. Your CPU's are pegged, and you're
hardly doing any IO. I wonder if there is some ineficient query, or
if its just very high query volume. Maybe you could try setting
log_min_duration_statement to try to track down the slowest of the
queri
17 matches
Mail list logo
