:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 11:22 AM
To: Oleg Lebedev; scott.marlowe
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] TPC-R benchmarks
Oleg,
> I declared all the indexes that you suggested and ran vacuum full
> analyze. The query plan has not changed and it's stil
ill finish any
time soon.
Thanks.
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Josh Berkus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:27 PM
To: Oleg Lebedev; scott.marlowe
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] TPC-R benchmarks
Oleg,
> I have another question. How do
, 'LG PACK', 'LG
PKG')
and l_quantity >= 24 and l_quantity <= 24 + 10
and p_size between 1 and 15
and l_shipmode in ('AIR', 'AIR REG')
and l_shipinstruct = 'DELIVER IN PERSON'
);
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 10:29 AM
To: Oleg Lebedev
Cc: Josh Berkus; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [PERFORM] TPC-R benchmarks
Have you tried increasing the statistics target for those columns that
are
getting bad estimates yet and then turning back on enable_nestloop and
rerunning analyze and s
to make this query run fast without hurting the
performance of the other queries?
Thanks.
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: scott.marlowe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 4:00 PM
To: Oleg Lebedev
Cc: Josh Berkus; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] TPC-R
I ran VACUUM FULL ANALYZE yesterday and the re-ran the query with
EXPLAIN ANALYZE.
I got the same query plan and execution time.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 4:20 PM
To: Oleg Lebedev
Cc: Josh Berkus; scott.marlowe; [EMAIL
Index Cond:
(orders.o_orderkey = "outer".l_orderkey)
-> Index Scan using
pk_supplier on supplier (cost=0.00..3.01 rows=1 width=8) (actual
time=0.08..0.08 rows=1 loops=348760)
1:42 AM
To: Oleg Lebedev; scott.marlowe
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] TPC-R benchmarks
Oleg,
> The output of the query should contain about 200 rows. So, I guess the
> planer is off assuming that the query should return 1 row.
Oh, also did you post the query before? Ca
That would be great! When do you think this would be ready for us to see
;?)
-Original Message-
From: Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 11:42 AM
To: Oleg Lebedev
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [PERFORM] Tuning/performance issue...
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003
To: Oleg Lebedev
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] TPC-R benchmarks
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Oleg Lebedev wrote:
> I continue struggling with the TPC-R benchmarks and wonder if anyone
> could help me optimize the query below. ANALYZE statistics indicate
> that the query s
Jeff,
I would really appreciate if you could send me that lengthy presentation
that you've written on pg/other dbs comparison.
Thanks.
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 6:23 AM
To: David Griffiths
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
I continue struggling with the TPC-R benchmarks and wonder if anyone
could help me optimize the query below. ANALYZE statistics indicate that
the query should run relatively fast, but it takes hours to complete. I
attached the query plan to this posting.
Thanks.
select
nation,
o_ye
: Josh Berkus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 12:11 PM
To: Oleg Lebedev; Mary Edie Meredith
Cc: Jenny Zhang; pgsql-performance
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] TPC-R benchmarks
Oleg,
> I just checked the restrictions on the TPC-R and TPC-H schemas and it
> seems that all i
-
From: Oleg Lebedev
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 11:23 AM
To: Mary Edie Meredith
Cc: Jenny Zhang; pgsql-performance
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] TPC-R benchmarks
Importance: Low
It took 10 hours to compute the query without the index on
lineitem.l_partkey. Once I created the index on
azing!
I just checked
-Original Message-
From: Mary Edie Meredith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 10:04 AM
To: Oleg Lebedev
Cc: Tom Lane; Jenny Zhang; pgsql-performance
Subject: RE: [PERFORM] TPC-R benchmarks
On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 07:35, Oleg Lebedev wrote
Message-
From: Mary Edie Meredith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 10:12 AM
To: Tom Lane
Cc: Oleg Lebedev; Jenny Zhang; pgsql-performance
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] TPC-R benchmarks
The TPC-H/R rules allow only minor changes to the SQL that are necessary
due to SQL
=36)
Index Cond: ("outer".p_partkey = lineitem.l_partkey)
SubPlan
-> Aggregate (cost=124.40..124.40 rows=1 width=11)
-> Index Scan using i_l_partkey on lineitem
(cost=0.00..124.32 rows=30 width=11)
Index Cond:
Title: Message
I am running TPC-R
benchmarks with a scale factor of 1, which correspond to approximately 1 GB
database size on PostgreSQL 7.3.4 installed on CygWin on Windows XP. I dedicated
128 MB of shared memory to my postrges installation.
Most of the queries
were able to complete in a m
18 matches
Mail list logo
