On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 21:06, John Fabiani wrote:
On Wednesday 14 September 2005 08:23, Scott Marlowe wrote:
OK. But how many are you updating between regular vacuums? That's the
real issue. If your regular vacuums aren't often enough, postgresql
starts lengthening the tables instead of
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 21:01, Warren Bell wrote:
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 13:20, Warren Bell wrote:
I am having problems with performance. I think this is a simple question
and
I am in the right place, if not, please redirect me.
I have a table with 36 fields that slows down quite a bit
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Scott Marlowe
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:24 AM
To: Warren Bell
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Speed problems
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 21:01, Warren Bell wrote
On Wednesday 14 September 2005 08:23, Scott Marlowe wrote:
OK. But how many are you updating between regular vacuums? That's the
real issue. If your regular vacuums aren't often enough, postgresql
starts lengthening the tables instead of reusing the space in them that
was freed by the last
I am having problems with performance. I think this is a simple question and
I am in the right place, if not, please redirect me.
I have a table with 36 fields that slows down quite a bit after some light
use. There are only 5 clients connected to this DB and they are doing mostly
inserts and
Warren Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have a table with 36 fields that slows down quite a bit after some light
use. There are only 5 clients connected to this DB and they are doing mostly
inserts and updates. There is no load on this server or db at all. This
table has had no more than
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 13:20, Warren Bell wrote:
I am having problems with performance. I think this is a simple question and
I am in the right place, if not, please redirect me.
I have a table with 36 fields that slows down quite a bit after some light
use. There are only 5 clients connected
When you say VACUUM do you really mean VACUUM ANALYZE? Have you tried a
simple ANALYZE?
I'm assuming of course that you have indexes that you want to use
Warren Bell wrote:
I am having problems with performance. I think this is a simple question and
I am in the right place, if not,
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 13:20, Warren Bell wrote:
I am having problems with performance. I think this is a simple question
and
I am in the right place, if not, please redirect me.
I have a table with 36 fields that slows down quite a bit after some
light
use. There are only 5 clients connected
