hey would be more authoritative and
> more representative of access patterns. Correct ?
>
> Best Regards,
> Mohammad
>
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:42 PM, desmodemone
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mohammad,
>> I think it's not enable
>>
Hi Mohammad,
I think it's not enable
"use_remote_estimate" during the creation of the foreign table
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/postgres-fdw.html
use_remote_estimate
This option, which can be specified for a foreign table or a foreign
server, contro
2014-11-10 18:43 GMT+01:00 Eric Ramirez :
>
> Hi,
> I have created a sample database with test data to help benchmark our
> application. The database has ten million records, and is running on a
> dedicated server(postgres 9.3) with 8GB of RAM. Our queries are pretty
> slow with this amount of da
2014-05-08 9:10 GMT+02:00 Rajiv Kasera :
> Dear Community friends,
>
>
>
> We are planning to use postgresql 9.3 for building a mobile backend. Can
> we get a benchmark on the level of concurrency that can be supported by
> Postgres 9.3 and it will be able to handle the spike in traffic if the app
2014-04-15 0:32 GMT+02:00 Mel Llaguno :
> I was given anecdotal information regarding HFS+ performance under OSX as
> being unsuitable for production PG deployments and that pg_test_fsync
> could be used to measure the relative speed versus other operating systems
> (such as Linux). In my performa
Yes, I rember was 1024*G*b , sorry,
2014-03-26 14:23 GMT+01:00 Albe Laurenz :
> desmodemone wrote:
>
> > max is 1024mb.
>
> That must be a typo.
> It can surely be much higher.
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
>
Il 26/mar/2014 13:36 "Ilya Kosmodemiansky" <
ilya.kosmodemian...@postgresql-consulting.com> ha scritto:
>
> Hi Alexey,
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Alexey Vasiliev
wrote:
> > I read from several sources, what maximum shared_buffers is 8GB.
>
> I believe that was an issue on some older vers
2014-03-25 15:56 GMT+01:00 Joshua D. Drake :
>
> On 03/25/2014 05:05 AM, Claudio Freire wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:39 AM, David Johnston wrote:
>>
>>> Hai,
Can anyone tell me the difference and performance between pgdump and
pg_basebackup if I want to backup a large d
e on entity2document2
> (cost=0.00..18509.70 rows=4595 width=131) (actual time=67.507..79945.362
> rows=13512 loops=1)
> Index Cond: ((name)::text = 'ranitidine'::text)
> Total runtime: 79967.705 ms
> (6 rows)
>
> Any other idea?
>
> Thank you
Il 05/mar/2014 00:36 "Venkata Balaji Nagothi" ha scritto:
>
> After looking at the distinct values, yes the composite Index on "name"
and "hepval" is not recommended. That would worsen - its expected.
>
> We need to look for other possible work around. Please drop off the above
Index. Let me see i
Hi Dave,
About the number of partitions , I didn't have so much
problems with hundreds of partitions ( like 360 days in a year ).
Moreover you could bypass the overhead of trigger with a direct insert on
the partition, also to have a parallel insert without to firing too much
the trig
2013/12/7 chidamparam muthusamy
> hi,
> thank you so much for the input.
> Can you please clarify the following points:
> *1. Output of BitmapAnd = 303660 rows*
> -> BitmapAnd (cost=539314.51..539314.51 rows=303660 width=0) (actual
> time=9083.085..9083.085 rows=0 loops=1)
>
Hello,
could you please post the postgresql version, the
postgresql.conf, the operative system used, the kernel version and the
filesystem used ?
Thank you
2013/12/5 Skarsol
> I'm trying to increase the speed of inserts in a database that is on a not
> super fast storage system. I
Hello,
your problem seems to arises from the sort that id sone to
disk :
" -> Sort (cost=221247.80..223164.10 rows=766519 width=376)
(actual time=50731.687..54455.528 rows=737662 loops=1)"
"Sort Key: qry1.id, qry1.nama, qry1.kodebarang,
qry1.namabar
Could you please attache the plan with explain buffers verbose?
thank you
2013/11/21 Robert DiFalco
> UNION and subselect both performed better than EXISTS for this particular
> case.
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:31 PM, desmodemone wrote:
>
>> Hi Robert, co
Hi Robert, could you try with "exists" ?
SELECT c.*
FROM contacts c
WHERE exists ( SELECT 1 FROM phone p WHERE p.addr =? and p.contact_id=
c.id )
OR exists (SELECT 1 FROM email e WHERE e.addr = ? and e.contact_id=c.id );
2013/11/21 Robert DiFalco
> I have found this:
>
> SELECT c.*
>
Hello,
I think you could try with an index on tweet table columns
"user_id, creation_time" [in this order , because the first argument is for
the equality predicate and the second with the range scan predicate, the
index tweet_user_id_creation_time_index is not ok because it has the
re
17 matches
Mail list logo
