On 04/01/2012 08:29 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
You could try using Unix domain socket and see if the performance
improves. A relevant link:
He said Windows. There are no Unix domain sockets on Windows. (And please
don't top-post)
Windows
On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> You could try using Unix domain socket and see if the performance
>> improves. A relevant link:
>
>
> He said Windows. There are no Unix domain sockets on Windows. (And please
> don't top-post)
Windows supports named pipes, which are functi
On 04/01/2012 06:01 PM, Andy wrote:
You could try using Unix domain socket and see if the performance
improves. A relevant link:
He said Windows. There are no Unix domain sockets on Windows. (And
please don't top-post)
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-per
On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Ofer Israeli wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We are running performance tests using PG 8.3 on a Windows 2008 R2 machine
> connecting locally over TCP.
8.3 will be not supported in under a year. Time to start testing upgrades.
http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/
--
You could try using Unix domain socket and see if the performance improves. A
relevant link:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/257433/postgresql-unix-domain-sockets-vs-tcp-sockets
From: Ofer Israeli
To: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org"
Sent: Sunday, Apri
Hi all,
We are running performance tests using PG 8.3 on a Windows 2008 R2 machine
connecting locally over TCP.
In our tests, we have found that it takes ~3ms to update a table with ~25
columns and 60K records, with one column indexed.
We have reached this number after many tweaks of the databas
