Geo Carncross wrote:
> This is going to take longer than I thought- my data set is too small,
> and Pg is taking a completely different set of execution plans.
Thanks a lot for your help!
> Need more data... Will try and scrounge some up.
When I did tests I imported some mbox archives of mailin
This is going to take longer than I thought- my data set is too small,
and Pg is taking a completely different set of execution plans.
Need more data... Will try and scrounge some up.
On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 12:17 -0500, Geo Carncross wrote:
> All right. I just got Pg installed here, will to some h
All right. I just got Pg installed here, will to some hacking.
On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 18:00 +0100, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> Geo Carncross wrote:
>
> > DROP the index for dbmail_messages_physmessage_idx - I think Pg is
> > selecting it because it has less collisions, the other one just isn't
> > bei
Geo Carncross wrote:
> DROP the index for dbmail_messages_physmessage_idx - I think Pg is
> selecting it because it has less collisions, the other one just isn't
> being used. I'd like an explain of it AFTER the index drop too (remember
> to REINDEX and do a VACUUM ANALYZE)
Sorry this will be lit
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 23:13 +0100, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> Geo Carncross wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 21:16 +0100, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> >
> >>> CREATE INDEX dbmail_messages_wide ON dbmail_messages
> >>> (mailbox_idnr,message_idnr,status); CREATE INDEX
> >>> dbmail_messages_wider ON dbmail_
Hi Kevin,
>>SELECT seen_flag, answered_flag, deleted_flag, flagged_flag, draft_flag,
>>recent_flag, TO_CHAR(internal_date, '-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS' ), rfcsize,
>>message_idnr FROM dbmail_messages msg, dbmail_physmessage pm WHERE pm.id
>>= msg.physmessage_id AND message_idnr BETWEEN '1' AND '417966'
A BUGNOTE has been added to this bug.
==
http://www.dbmail.org/mantis/bug_view_advanced_page.php?bug_id=164
==
Reported By:real10us
Assigned T
A BUGNOTE has been added to this bug.
==
http://www.dbmail.org/mantis/bug_view_advanced_page.php?bug_id=177
==
Reported By:mobrien
Assigned To
Thomas Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That is much better but still very slow - I don't understand why
> PostgreSQL is that slow here?
Drop the superfluous ORDER BY clause.
-tih
--
Don't ascribe to stupidity what can be adequately explained by ignorance.
Thomas Mueller wrote:
> Hi Aaron,
>
> >>now I have only one slow query left - unfortunately I have no idea why
> >>it is that slow. The mailbox contains ~1800 mails. It takes 45 seconds
> >>to open it:
> >>
> >>SELECT seen_flag, answered_flag, deleted_flag, flagged_flag, draft_flag,
> >>recent_fla
Thomas Mueller wrote:
> now I have only one slow query left - unfortunately I have no idea why
> it is that slow. The mailbox contains ~1800 mails. It takes 45 seconds
> to open it:
>
> SELECT seen_flag, answered_flag, deleted_flag, flagged_flag, draft_flag,
> recent_flag, TO_CHAR(internal_date, '
Paul, please commit the second patch to this bug to SVN, both for
dbmail_2_0_branch and trunk, thanks!
Aaron
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> A BUGNOTE has been added to this bug.
> ==
> http://www.dbmail.org/man
A BUGNOTE has been added to this bug.
==
http://www.dbmail.org/mantis/bug_view_advanced_page.php?bug_id=177
==
Reported By:mobrien
Assigned To
13 matches
Mail list logo
