On 24/08/11 15:15, Tom Lane wrote:
Mark Kirkwoodmark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz writes:
I am in the progress of an 8.3 to 8.4 upgrade for a customer. I seem to
have stumbled upon what looks like a regression. The two databases
(8.3.14 and 8.4.8) have identical tuning parameters (where that makes
On 31/08/2011 4:30 AM, Andy Colson wrote:
Hi all,
I have read things someplace saying not exists was better than not
in... or something like that. Not sure if that was for in/exists and
not in/not exists, and for a lot of records or not.
`EXISTS' may perform faster than `IN', yes. Using
Hello all,
I have a query which takes about 20 minutes to execute and retrieves
2000-odd records. The explain for the query is pasted here
http://explain.depesz.com/s/52f
The same query, with similar data structures/indexes and data comes back
in 50 seconds in Oracle. We just ported the product
On 31.08.2011 12:00, Jayadevan M wrote:
Hello all,
I have a query which takes about 20 minutes to execute and retrieves
2000-odd records. The explain for the query is pasted here
http://explain.depesz.com/s/52f
The same query, with similar data structures/indexes and data comes back
in 50
Where is the query? And also paste the \d to show the tables and
indexes.
-Sushant.
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 14:30 +0530, Jayadevan M wrote:
Hello all,
I have a query which takes about 20 minutes to execute and retrieves
2000-odd records. The explain for the query is pasted here
Hello,
Please run EXPLAIN ANALYZE on the query and post that, it's hard to say
what's wrong from just the query plan, without knowing where the time is
actually spent. And the schema of the tables involved, and any indexes
on them. (see also
Hello,
Please run EXPLAIN ANALYZE on the query and post that, it's hard to say
what's wrong from just the query plan, without knowing where the time is
actually spent.
Here is the explain analyze
http://explain.depesz.com/s/MY1
Regards,
Jayadevan
DISCLAIMER:
The information in this
Hello,
Please run EXPLAIN ANALYZE on the query and post that, it's hard to
say
what's wrong from just the query plan, without knowing where the time
is
actually spent.
Here is the explain analyze
http://explain.depesz.com/s/MY1
Going through the url tells me that statistics may
Missed out looping in community...
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Venkat Balaji venkat.bal...@verse.inwrote:
Could you help us know the tables and columns on which Indexes are built ?
Query is performing sorting based on key upper(column) and that is where i
believe the cost is high.
The
On 31 Srpen 2011, 13:19, Jayadevan M wrote:
Hello,
Please run EXPLAIN ANALYZE on the query and post that, it's hard to
say
what's wrong from just the query plan, without knowing where the time
is
actually spent.
Here is the explain analyze
http://explain.depesz.com/s/MY1
Going
A really interesting part is the sort near the bottom -
- Sort (cost=1895.95..1896.49 rows=215 width=61) (actual
time=25.926..711784.723 rows=2673340321 loops=1)
Sort Key: memmst.memshpsta
Sort Method: quicksort Memory: 206kB
- Nested Loop (cost=0.01..1887.62 rows=215
Jayadevan M wrote:
And the schema of the tables involved, and any indexes on them.
The details of the tables and indexes may take a bit of effort to
explain. Will do that.
In psql you can do \d to get a decent summary.
Without seeing the query and the table definitions, it's hard to
On 8/30/2011 8:33 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 31/08/2011 4:30 AM, Andy Colson wrote:
Hi all,
I have read things someplace saying not exists was better than not
in... or something like that. Not sure if that was for in/exists and
not in/not exists, and for a lot of records or not.
`EXISTS' may
On 31 Srpen 2011, 15:59, Andy Colson wrote:
I assume:
Buckets: 16384 Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 4531kB
That means a total of 4.5 meg of ram was used for the hash, so if my
work_mem was lower than that it would swap? (or choose a different plan?)
Why don't you try that? Just set the work_mem
Hi all,
I am running a simple query:
SELECT * FROM public.Frame
Time taken:
35.833 ms (i.e. roughly 35 seconds)
Number of rows:
121830
Number of columns:
38
This is extremely slow for a database server.
Can anyone help me in finding the problem?
Thanks,
KOtto
Client:
When you ran it, did it really feel like 30 seconds? Or did it come
right back real quick?
Because your report says:
35.833 ms
Thats ms, or milliseconds, or 0.035 seconds.
-Andy
On 8/31/2011 8:04 AM, Kai Otto wrote:
Hi all,
I am running a simple query:
SELECT * FROM public.“Frame”
On August 31, 2011 11:26:57 AM Andy Colson wrote:
When you ran it, did it really feel like 30 seconds? Or did it come
right back real quick?
Because your report says:
35.833 ms
Thats ms, or milliseconds, or 0.035 seconds.
I think the . is a thousands separator in some locales,
On 8/31/2011 1:51 PM, Alan Hodgson wrote:
On August 31, 2011 11:26:57 AM Andy Colson wrote:
When you ran it, did it really feel like 30 seconds? Or did it come
right back real quick?
Because your report says:
35.833 ms
Thats ms, or milliseconds, or 0.035 seconds.
I think the . is a
Kai Otto ko...@medis.nl wrote:
Time taken:
35.833 ms (i.e. roughly 35 seconds)
Which is it? 35 ms or 35 seconds?
Number of rows:
121830
Number of columns:
38
This is extremely slow for a database server.
Can anyone help me in finding the problem?
Seq Scan on Frame
On August 31, 2011 11:56:56 AM Andy Colson wrote:
On 8/31/2011 1:51 PM, Alan Hodgson wrote:
On August 31, 2011 11:26:57 AM Andy Colson wrote:
When you ran it, did it really feel like 30 seconds? Or did it come
right back real quick?
Because your report says:
35.833 ms
Thats
Mark Kirkwood mark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz writes:
[ assorted examples showing that commit
7f3eba30c9d622d1981b1368f2d79ba0999cdff2 has got problems ]
Thanks for the test cases. After playing with these for a bit I believe
I've figured out the error in my previous thinking. Clamping the
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 5:11 AM, shailesh singh shaileshj...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to configure Logging of postgres in such a way that messages of
different severity should be logged in different log file. eg: all ERROR
message should be written in error-msg.log file while all NOTICE mesage
22 matches
Mail list logo
