Hi Martin, please CC the mailing-list,
then others can repply ;)
Cédric Villemain (13:59 2008-03-31):
Le Monday 31 March 2008, Martin Kjeldsen a écrit :
I've done the same query on a 8.2.5 database. The first one is prepared
first and the other is executed directly.
I understand why the
Hi there,
I have an application accessing a postgres database, and I need to estimate
the following parameters:
- read / write ratio
- reads/second on typical load / peak load
- writes/second on typical load / peak load
Is there any available tool to achieve that ?
TIA,
Sabin
--
Sent via
Hi,
the following statement retrieves 16358 rows in a cursor by fetching
1024 rows in bulks on a 8.2.4 server:
DECLARE curs_285058224 CURSOR FOR SELECT objid, attrid, aggrid, lineid,
objval FROM atobjval WHERE objid IN
(281479288456304,281479288456359,281479288456360,281479288456384,2814792
On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Sabin Coanda wrote:
I have an application accessing a postgres database, and I need to estimate
the following parameters:
- read / write ratio
- reads/second on typical load / peak load
- writes/second on typical load / peak load
Is there any available tool to achieve that
Hell, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When we use 20 as default_statistics_target the retrieval of the data
takes 7.5 seconds - with 25 as default_statistics_target (with restart
and analyze) it takes 0.6 seconds.
The query plan is identical in both situations (row estimation differs a
Hi everyone,
I am running a test with 1 thread calling a stored
procedure in an endless loop. The stored procedure
inserts 1000 records in a table that does not have
indexes or constraints.
In the log file I see that the time to execute the
procedure sometimes it jumps from 100 ms to 700 ms.
The
That's it - I found a more simple statement which has the same problem
(0.02 seconds vs. 6 seconds):
With cursor (6 seconds):
appcooelakdb2= explain DECLARE curs_1 CURSOR FOR SELECT DISTINCT
t2.objid FROM atobjval t2 WHERE t2.aggrid = 0 AND t2.attrid =
281479288455385 ORDER BY t2.objid;
Hell, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's it - I found a more simple statement which has the same problem
(0.02 seconds vs. 6 seconds):
This isn't necessarily the very same problem --- what are the plans for
your original case with the two different stats settings?
What's the difference
Here are the query plans for the original query - looks very similar (to
me):
EXPLAIN SELECT objid, attrid, aggrid, lineid, objval FROM atobjval WHERE
objid IN (281479288456304,many of them,285774255837674) ORDER BY
objid, attrid, aggrid, lineid;
QUERY
Hell, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's CURSOR_OPT_FAST_PLAN and isn't it? Our application reads the full
results of most cursors.
Just out of curiosity, why use a cursor at all then? But anyway, you
might want to consider running a custom build with a higher setting for
tuple_fraction
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 12:42:03PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
That's CURSOR_OPT_FAST_PLAN and isn't it? Our application reads the full
results of most cursors.
Just out of curiosity, why use a cursor at all then?
This isn't the same scenario as the OP, but I've used a cursor in cases where
I
Hi
Iam getting the below error when iam running my program.
ERROR: cannot have more than 2^32-1 commands in a transaction
SQL state: 54000
If iam not wrong this error ocuurs when there are too many statements executing
in one single transaction.
But this error is occuring in a function that iam
Looks much better when using 0.0 for tuple_fraction in case of a cursor instead
of 0.1.
But why are the first 15 fetches (15360 rows) processed in 0.5 seconds and the
last fetch (998 rows) takes 7 seconds.
Are we just unlucky that the last fetch takes that long?
EXPLAIN SELECT objid, attrid,
Hell, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But why are the first 15 fetches (15360 rows) processed in 0.5 seconds and
the last fetch (998 rows) takes 7 seconds.
Are we just unlucky that the last fetch takes that long?
Well, the indexscan plan is going to scan through all the rows in objid
order
14 matches
Mail list logo
