On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 10:25:34AM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
>
> OK, so it sounds like what is happening is that your update cannot do
> a "Heap-Only Tuple" (HOT) update, because there is not enough room in
> each data page for the new copy of rows being updated. So it is
> forced to put the new c
On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 09:13:09AM -0500, Steven Lembark wrote:
>
> > > It's kind of annoying that I would need to drop the indexes that
> > > aren't modified just to run an update query.
> >
> > I dropped all the index except for the primary key. It was still
> > as slow when it started, but
On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 11:38:27AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 09:32:28PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> > On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have an update query that's been running for 48 hours
On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 09:32:28PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have an update query that's been running for 48 hours now.
> > Since it started it used about 2.5% CPU, and is writing to the
> >
Hi,
I have an update query that's been running for 48 hours now.
Since it started it used about 2.5% CPU, and is writing to the
disk at about 3 MB/s, and reading at about 2 MB/s. It's mostly
waiting for the disks.
The query plan looks like this:
QUER
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 01:23:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is recode a feature that's normally enabled?
>
> > ./configure '--enable-recode' '--enable-integer-datetimes' '--enable-debug'
> > '--with-perl' '--with-pam' '--with-openssl' '--with-gnu-ld'
>
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 01:52:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'll probably rewrite that code to use rangeSockAddr /
> > SockAddr_cidr_mask instead of having it's own cidr code.
>
> Given that it's been under de
