-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/07 17:12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 17 July 2007 17:47:01 Tom Lane wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
i think i got it fixed as i saw that i pushed my maintenance_work_mem too
high. It was higher than physical ram :-(
Ooops, that
Am Montag, 16. Juli 2007 16:19 schrieben Sie:
Janning Vygen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After this i create the index and it took 10 hours just for one index
(primary key). I have 100.000.000 rows with one PK (int8), two integer
data values, and two FK (int8)
What PG version is this? We
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
i think i got it fixed as i saw that i pushed my maintenance_work_mem too
high. It was higher than physical ram :-(
Ooops, that will definitely cause problems.
regards, tom lane
---(end of
On Tuesday 17 July 2007 17:47:01 Tom Lane wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
i think i got it fixed as i saw that i pushed my maintenance_work_mem too
high. It was higher than physical ram :-(
Ooops, that will definitely cause problems.
yes it did! I ran it again. And now it takes 10 minutes
Janning Vygen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After this i create the index and it took 10 hours just for one index
(primary
key). I have 100.000.000 rows with one PK (int8), two integer data values,
and two FK (int8)
What PG version is this? We did a fair amount of work on sort speed
for 8.2.
Tom Lane wrote:
Janning Vygen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After this i create the index and it took 10 hours just for one index
(primary
key). I have 100.000.000 rows with one PK (int8), two integer data values,
and two FK (int8)
What PG version is this? We did a fair amount of work on
