Re: [ADMIN] killing a hung postgres process brings down the Postgres database server on MAC OS X!

2004-09-27 Thread Tom Lane
Qing Zhao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If we do "kill -9 pid" to get rid of the deserted process, it bring > down the PG database server entirely. It's supposed to. > Is there a way to kill the dead processes/thread without really affect > the PG server? It will time out by itself eventually (

Re: [ADMIN] killing a hung postgres process brings down the Postgres database server on MAC OS X!

2004-09-27 Thread Rosser Schwarz
while you weren't looking, Qing Zhao wrote: [...] > Is there a way to kill the dead processes/thread without really affect > the PG server? See: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/static/postmaster-shutdown.html I have occasionally had to kill -9 a backend, but it's never been pleasant. Avoid

Re: [ADMIN] moving pg_xlog

2004-09-27 Thread Gaetano Mendola
Anjan Dave wrote: All: What’s the best way to separate pg_xlog to another drive? I am using a soft link currently in the data directory (per docs), but is there another way of doing this? Nope currently. Regards Gaetano Mendola ---(end of broadcast)-

[ADMIN] killing a hung postgres process brings down the Postgres database server on MAC OS X!

2004-09-27 Thread Qing Zhao
Hi, there, We are using PostgrSQL 7.3.4 on MAC OS X G5 with Dual prpcessors and 8 GB RAM. The postgreSQL server is our backend that stores information for a JBoss server. Every once in a while, we see a process (thread) that processing a request from the JBoss server gets timed out. Suppose

Re: [ADMIN] tsearch2 poor performance

2004-09-27 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Kris Kiger wrote: > Yes, it is much better than no index of sequential scan. We may just be > looking at the best performance tsearch2 can offer on my machine. Hmm, tsearch2 with no index should be faster than LIKE, because tsearch2 already has *parsed* and *sorted* list.

[ADMIN] moving pg_xlog

2004-09-27 Thread Anjan Dave
All:   What’s the best way to separate pg_xlog to another drive? I am using a soft link currently in the data directory (per docs), but is there another way of doing this?   Thanks, Anjan

Re: [ADMIN] tsearch2 poor performance

2004-09-27 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Kris Kiger wrote: > Oleg, > > Thanks for the help on this. > > The query I used to return the 508 number is: > SELECT * FROM stat('SELECT vector FROM product') ORDER BY ndoc > desc, word ; > > Testing says, the more words I use, the faster the query is. M

Re: [ADMIN] tsearch2 poor performance

2004-09-27 Thread Kris Kiger
Yes, it is much better than no index of sequential scan. We may just be looking at the best performance tsearch2 can offer on my machine. search_test=# explain analyze SELECT count(q) FROM product, to_tsquery('oil') AS q WHERE vector @@ q;