Re: The good, old times - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Guillaume Cottenceau
Subject Re: The good, old times
Date
Msg-id 87hbdeqkbg.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan
Whole thread Raw
In response to The good, old times  (Mladen Gogala <mladen.gogala@vmsinfo.com>)
Responses Re: The good, old times  (Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>)
List pgsql-performance
Mladen Gogala <mladen.gogala 'at' vmsinfo.com> writes:

> I am running a postgres update on one of my machines:
>
> Downloading Packages:
> (1/7): postgresql90-plpython-9.0.2-2PGDG.rhel5.x86_64.rp |  50 kB
> 00:02     (2/7): postgresql90-plperl-9.0.2-2PGDG.rhel5.x86_64.rpm  |
> 51 kB     00:03     (3/7):
> postgresql90-libs-9.0.2-2PGDG.rhel5.x86_64.rpm    | 217 kB     00:14
> (4/7): postgresql90-contrib-9.0.2-2PGDG.rhel5.x86_64.rpm | 451 kB
> 00:40     (5/7): postgresql90-9.0.2-2PGDG.rhel5.x86_64.rpm         |
> 1.4 MB     01:57     (6/7):
> postgresql90-devel-9.0.2-2PGDG.rhel5.x86_64.rpm   | 1.6 MB     02:48
> (7/7): postgresql90-se (68%) 44% [=====       ] 7.0 kB/s | 2.2 MB
> 06:33 ETA
>
> 7 kilobytes per second???  That brings back the times of the good, old
> 9600 USR modems and floppy disks.

What's your point and in what is it related to that ML?

--
Guillaume Cottenceau

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Mladen Gogala
Date:
Subject: The good, old times
Next
From: Laszlo Nagy
Date:
Subject: Re: Slow query + why bitmap index scan??