"Alex Deucher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> and here are the query plans referenced in my last email (apologies if
> you get these twice, they didn't seem to go through the first time,
> perhaps due to size?). I cut out the longer ones.
The first case looks a whole lot like 8.2 does not think it
and here are the query plans referenced in my last email (apologies if
you get these twice, they didn't seem to go through the first time,
perhaps due to size?). I cut out the longer ones.
Thanks,
Alex
postgres 7.4
EXPLAIN ANALYZE select num, c1, c2, c3, c4, c5, c6, c7, c8, c9, c10,
c11 from
On 2007-04-02, Peter Schuller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have confirmed that I am seeing expected performance for random
> short and highly concurrent reads in one large (> 200 GB) file. The
> I/O is done using libaio however, so depending on implementation I
> suppose the I/O scheduling behavi
Sorry if anyone receives this twice; it didn't seem to go through the
first time. I'll attach the query plans to another email in case they
were causing a size limit problem. Also here's the here's the table
description:
Table "public.t1"
Column | Type | Modifiers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All,
Currently in one of the projects we want to restrict the
unauthorized users to the Postgres DB.Here we are using Postgres
version 8.2.0
Can anybody tell me how can I provide the user based previleges
to the Postgres DB so that, we can restri
Hi All,
Currently in one of the projects we want to restrict the unauthorized
users to the Postgres DB.Here we are using Postgres version 8.2.0
Can anybody tell me how can I provide the user based previleges to the
Postgres DB so that, we can restrict the unauthorized users as
Hello,
> > SELECT * FROM test WHERE value = 'xxx' LIMIT 1000;
>
> I tested this on a 14-way software raid10 on freebsd, using pg 8.1.6, and
> couldn't reproduce anything like it. With one client I get about 200 disk
> requests per second, scaling almost exactly linearly for the first 5 or so
> cl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Lane wrote:
> Richard Huxton writes:
>> Ah, but it's got no way of knowing what matches you'll get for
>> '%anything%'. There's no easy way to get statistics for matching substrings.
>
> 8.2 actually tries the match on the most-common-values lis
Hello,
> If you are dealing with timed data or similar, you may consider to
> partition your table(s).
Unfortunately this is not the case; the insertion is more or less
random (not quite, but for the purpose of this problem it is).
Thanks for the pointers though. That is sure to be useful in som
* Denis Lishtovny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070402 09:20]:
>Hello All.
>
>I have a lot of tables and indexes in database. I must to determine which
>indexes are not using or using seldon in databese . I enabled all posible
>statistics in config but a can`t uderstand how to do this.
>
Hi,
On Monday 02 April 2007 10:12, Denis Lishtovny wrote:
| I have a lot of tables and indexes in database. I must to determine which
| indexes are not using or using seldon in databese . I enabled all posible
| statistics in config but a can`t uderstand how to do this.
| Thanks.
Try "select * fr
Hello All.
I have a lot of tables and indexes in database. I must to determine which
indexes are not using or using seldon in databese . I enabled all posible
statistics in config but a can`t uderstand how to do this.
Thanks.
p.s for example i need this to reduce database size for increase backup
12 matches
Mail list logo
