On Apr 1, 2010, at 1:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Scott Carey writes:
>> Still off topic:
>
>> Will CLUSTER/VF respect FILLFACTOR in 9.0?
>
>> As far as I can tell in 8.4, it does not.
>
> Works for me, in both branches.
>
I stand corrected. I must have done something wrong in my test. On a
Scott Carey writes:
> Still off topic:
> Will CLUSTER/VF respect FILLFACTOR in 9.0?
> As far as I can tell in 8.4, it does not.
Works for me, in both branches.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make chan
On Mar 31, 2010, at 1:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Scott Carey wrote:
>> On Mar 27, 2010, at 6:35 AM, Andy Colson wrote:
>>>
>>> Dont "VACUUM FULL", its not helping you, and is being removed in newer
>>> versions.
>>>
>>
>> Off topic: How is that going to wor
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010, Eliot Gable wrote:
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Faheem Mitha wrote:
So, should I add indexes on the individual foreign key cols
idlink_id
and anno_id after all?
I doubt that would help.
You're sure of this?
It is
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Faheem Mitha wrote:
>
> So, should I add indexes on the individual foreign key cols idlink_id
>>> and anno_id after all?
>>>
>>
>> I doubt that would help.
>>
>
> You're sure of this?
>
>
>
It is always best to test and be certain.
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Faheem Mitha wrote:
I had set the foreign keys in question (on the geno table) to be
primary keys. This is because this setup is basically a glorified
spreadsheet, and I don't want more than one cell corresponding to a
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Faheem Mitha wrote:
> I had set the foreign keys in question (on the geno table) to be primary
> keys. This is because this setup is basically a glorified spreadsheet, and I
> don't want more than one cell corresponding to a particular tuple of
> idlink.id and anno.
Hi Eliot,
Thanks for the comment.
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010, Eliot Gable wrote:
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Faheem Mitha wrote:
Looking at this more closely, idlink_id and anno_id are primary keys, so
already have indexes on them, so my understanding (from the docs) is
there is no purpose i
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Faheem Mitha wrote:
> Looking at this more closely, idlink_id and anno_id are primary keys, so
> already have indexes on them, so my understanding (from the docs) is there
> is no purpose in creating them. That's why I removed the indexes that were
> there (back l
raghavendra t wrote:
> System Config
> -
> CPU - Intel* Xenon* CPU
> CPU Speed - 3.16 GHz
> Server Model - Sun Fire X4150
> RAM-Size - 16GB
The disk system matters a lot, too. How many drives do you have in
what RAID configuration(s)?
> My question is something like Stev
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 19:17 +0530, raghavendra t wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> System Config
> -
> CPU - Intel® Xenon® CPU
> CPU Speed - 3.16 GHz
> Server Model - Sun Fire X4150
> RAM-Size - 16GB
>
> Steve:
> So am I to understand I don't need to do daily reindexing
Hi All,
System Config
-
CPU - Intel® Xenon® CPU
CPU Speed - 3.16 GHz
Server Model - Sun Fire X4150
RAM-Size - 16GB
> Steve:
So am I to understand I don't need to do daily reindexing as a maintenance
> measure with 8.3.7 on FreeBSD.
My question is something like Steve's, why
So am I to understand I don't need to do daily reindexing as a
maintenance measure with 8.3.7 on FreeBSD.
Sometimes it's better to have indexes with some space in them so every
insert doesn't hit a full index page and triggers a page split to make
some space.
Of course if the index is 90
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Faheem Mitha wrote:
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Faheem Mitha
You might need to create some indices, too.
Ok. To what purpose? This query picks up everything from the
tables and the planner does table scans, so conventio
raghavendra t wrote:
1. What are the parameters will effect, when issuing the REINDEX command
2. Best possible way to increase the spead of the REINDEX
If you haven't done the usual general tuning on your server, that might
help. http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Tuning_Your_PostgreSQL_Server i
On 03/31/2010 11:11 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
Jaime Casanova wrote:
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 5:33 PM, raghavendra t
wrote:
Why are you doing that?
Our table face lot of updates and deletes in a day, so we prefer reindex to
update the indexes as well overcome with a corrupted index.
do you ha
16 matches
Mail list logo
