On Fri, 3 May 2024 at 09:33, David Zhang wrote:
> Is there a simple way to get the min of ctid faster than using min(), but
> similar to get the max of ctid using pg_relation_size?
The equivalent approximation is always '(0,1)'.
David
Thanks a lot David Rowley for your suggestion in details.
On 2024-04-08 3:23 p.m., David Rowley wrote:
On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 at 09:52, David Zhang wrote:
Finding the exact ctid seems overkill for what you need. Why you
could just find the maximum block with:
N =
On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 at 11:02, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> David Rowley writes:
> > Unsure if such a feature is worthwhile. I think maybe not for just
> > min(ctid)/max(ctid). However, there could be other reasons, such as
> > the transform OR to UNION stuff that Tom worked on a few years ago.
> > That
David Rowley writes:
> Unsure if such a feature is worthwhile. I think maybe not for just
> min(ctid)/max(ctid). However, there could be other reasons, such as
> the transform OR to UNION stuff that Tom worked on a few years ago.
> That needed to eliminate duplicate rows that matched both OR
On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 at 09:52, David Zhang wrote:
> However, when executing SELECT min(ctid) and max(ctid), it performs a
> Seq Scan, which can be slow for a large table. Is there a way to
> retrieve the minimum and maximum ctid other than using the system
> functions min() and max()?
Finding the
Hi Postgres hackers,
I'm reaching out to gather some comments on enhancing the efficiency of
migrating particularly large tables with significant data volumes in
PostgreSQL.
When migrating a particularly large table with a significant amount of
data, users sometimes tend to split the table
