2010/4/28 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:33 AM, Cédric Villemain
cedric.villemain.deb...@gmail.com wrote:
In the first query, the planner doesn't use the information of the 2,3,4.
It just does a : I'll bet I'll have 2 rows in t1 (I think it should
say 3, but it
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Which is the opposite of my experience; currently we have several
clients who have issues which required more-frequent analyzes on
specific tables.
That's all fine, but probably not too relevant to the original
complaint -
2010/5/1 Cédric Villemain cedric.villemain.deb...@gmail.com:
2010/4/28 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:33 AM, Cédric Villemain
cedric.villemain.deb...@gmail.com wrote:
In the first query, the planner doesn't use the information of the 2,3,4.
It just does a : I'll
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Thomas Kellerer spam_ea...@gmx.net wrote:
Rick, 22.04.2010 22:42:
So, in a large table, the scale_factor is the dominant term. In a
small table, the threshold is the dominant term. But both are taken into
account.
The default values are set for small tables;
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Which is the opposite of my experience; currently we have several
clients who have issues which required more-frequent analyzes on
specific tables. Before 8.4, vacuuming more frequently, especially on
large tables, was
Robert Haas wrote:
I don't have a stake in the ground on what the right settings are, but
I think it's fair to say that if you vacuum OR analyze much less
frequently than what we recommend my default, it might break.
I think the default settings are essentially minimum recommended
Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
If anything, I'd expect people to want to increase how often it runs,
for tables where much less than 20% dead is a problem. The most common
situation I've seen where that's the case is when you have a hotspot of
heavily updated rows in a large
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Which is the opposite of my experience; currently we have several
clients who have issues which required more-frequent analyzes on
specific
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Which is the opposite of my experience; currently we have several
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
I don't have a stake in the ground on what the right settings are, but
I think it's fair to say that if you vacuum OR analyze much less
frequently than what we recommend my default, it might break.
I
11 matches
Mail list logo
