Michael Okner writes:
> I've been able to reproduce the issue in a generic environment and posted the
> code to create this environment on my GitHub at
> https://github.com/mikeokner/pgsql_test. The query plans demonstrating this
> issue are pasted here: http://bpaste.net/show/92138/. I've poke
I'd say you either have overloaded application (try increasing timeout),
too small pool (increase pool) or connection leaks (find and fix).
18 квіт. 2013 23:45, "itishree sukla" напис.
> Dear All,
>
> Can any one please help me to fix this issue, i am getting this error from
> our application, cu
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 04:30:54PM -0700, bing1221 wrote:
> Our server is running postgresql 8.4.15. During day time the cpu usage always
> around 80%, but it's not IO bound. The swap space is looking OK also. Also
> we setup pgbadger and enable all logs to monitor the slow query but they all
> fin
Our server is running postgresql 8.4.15. During day time the cpu usage always
around 80%, but it's not IO bound. The swap space is looking OK also. Also
we setup pgbadger and enable all logs to monitor the slow query but they all
finished quick. Usually it has 60 incoming connections, and we have
p
Hi Itsrhree
>From the machine where is running the tomcat, do you check that you can
>connect to postgresql server (remember check parameters of connection, user,
>password, ip)?
Having this first step tested, then:
Do you have the correct connection pool configured on Catalina (Tomcat) and le
Dear All,
Can any one please help me to fix this issue, i am getting this error from
our application, currently Database is running on 9.2.
2013-04-17 11:37:25:151 - {ERROR} database.ConnectionManager Thread
[http-8080-1]; --- getConnection() Exception:
org.apache.commons.dbcp.SQLNestedException
Hello all,
I'm running into an issue when joining between to tables that are partitioned
by month. At this point I'm leaning towards it being a bug in the planner but
it could be due to something I'm not doing properly as well. Each parent table
is empty and has about 30 child tables, and there
dmitry potapov writes:
> I recently stumbled upon on what could be a planner bug or a corner case.
> If " OR ..." is added to WHERE clause of SELECT query,
> then the planner chooses a very inefficient plan. Consider a query:
> SELECT count(k0.id)
> FROM k0
> WHERE 1 = 2
> OR k0.id IN (
>
On 18/04/13 15:20, dmitry potapov wrote:
Hello,
I recently stumbled upon on what could be a planner bug or a corner
case. If " OR ..." is added to WHERE clause of SELECT
query, then the planner chooses a very inefficient plan. Consider a query:
If I comment out "1=2 OR", then the plan changes
Hello,
I recently stumbled upon on what could be a planner bug or a corner case.
If " OR ..." is added to WHERE clause of SELECT query,
then the planner chooses a very inefficient plan. Consider a query:
SELECT count(k0.id)
FROM k0
WHERE 1 = 2
OR k0.id IN (
SELECT k1.k0_id
FRO
10 matches
Mail list logo
