Tom Lane wrote:
Sergey Burladyan eshkin...@gmail.com writes:
show maintenance_work_mem ;
maintenance_work_mem
--
128MB
create table a (i1 int, i2 int, i3 int, i4 int, i5 int, i6 int);
insert into a select n, n, n, n, n, n from generate_series(1, 10) as n;
create
On Mar 20, 2009, at 4:58 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Joe Uhl joe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 20, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
What does the cs entry on vmstat say at this time? If you're cs is
skyrocketing then you're getting a context switch storm,
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Joe Uhl wrote:
Can anyone recommend a whitebox vendor?
I dumped a list of recommended vendors from a discussion here a while back
at http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SCSI_vs._IDE/SATA_Disks you could get
started with.
--
* Greg Smith gsm...@gregsmith.com
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Greg Smith gsm...@gregsmith.com wrote:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Joe Uhl wrote:
Can anyone recommend a whitebox vendor?
I dumped a list of recommended vendors from a discussion here a while back
at http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SCSI_vs._IDE/SATA_Disks you could
I hate to nag, but could anybody help me with this? We have a few
related queries that are causing noticeable service delays in our
production system. I've tried a number of different things, but I'm
running out of ideas and don't know what to do next.
Thanks,
Bryan
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at
At 02:47 PM 3/24/2009, Joe Uhl wrote:
Turns out we may have an opportunity to purchase a new database
server with this increased load. Seems that the best route, based
on feedback to this thread, is to go whitebox, get quad opterons,
and get a very good disk controller.
Can anyone
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Ron rjpe...@earthlink.net wrote:
At 02:47 PM 3/24/2009, Joe Uhl wrote:
Turns out we may have an opportunity to purchase a new database server
with this increased load. Seems that the best route, based on feedback to
this thread, is to go whitebox, get quad
On 3/24/09 4:16 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Ron rjpe...@earthlink.net wrote:
At 02:47 PM 3/24/2009, Joe Uhl wrote:
Turns out we may have an opportunity to purchase a new database server
with this increased load. Seems that the best
I'm trying to pin down some performance issues with a machine where I
work, we are seeing (read only) query response times blow out by an
order of magnitude or more at busy times. Initially we blamed
autovacuum, but after a tweak of the cost_delay it is *not* the
problem. Then I looked at
On 3/24/09 6:09 PM, Mark Kirkwood mar...@paradise.net.nz wrote:
I'm trying to pin down some performance issues with a machine where I
work, we are seeing (read only) query response times blow out by an
order of magnitude or more at busy times. Initially we blamed
autovacuum, but after a
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Scott Carey sc...@richrelevance.com wrote:
Your xlogs are occasionally close to max usage too -- which is suspicious at
10MB/sec. There is no reason for them to be on ext3 since they are a
transaction log that syncs writes so file system journaling doesn't mean
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Mark Kirkwood mar...@paradise.net.nz wrote:
I'm trying to pin down some performance issues with a machine where I work,
we are seeing (read only) query response times blow out by an order of
magnitude or more at busy times. Initially we blamed autovacuum, but
Brian,
I hate to nag, but could anybody help me with this? We have a few
related queries that are causing noticeable service delays in our
production system. I've tried a number of different things, but I'm
running out of ideas and don't know what to do next.
For some reason, your first
There is one thing I don`t understand:
- Nested Loop (cost=0.00..180564.28 rows=1806
width=37) (actual time=0.192..60.214 rows=3174 loops=1)
- Index Scan using visitors_userid_index2 on
visitors v (cost=0.00..2580.97 rows=1300 width=33) (actual
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, David Rees wrote:
I would tend to recommend ext3 in data=writeback and make sure that
it's mounted with noatime over using ext2 - for the sole reason that
if the system shuts down unexpectedly, you don't have to worry about a
long fsck when bringing it back up.
Well,
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:04 PM, marcin mank marcin.m...@gmail.com wrote:
There is one thing I don`t understand:
- Nested Loop (cost=0.00..180564.28 rows=1806
width=37) (actual time=0.192..60.214 rows=3174 loops=1)
- Index Scan using visitors_userid_index2
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
For some reason, your first post didn't make it to the list, which is why
nobody responded.
Weird... I've been having problems with gmail and google reader all week.
I've got a query on our production system that isn't
Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Mark Kirkwood mar...@paradise.net.nz wrote:
I'm trying to pin down some performance issues with a machine where I work,
we are seeing (read only) query response times blow out by an order of
magnitude or more at busy times. Initially we
18 matches
Mail list logo
