Mailing lists [pgsql-performance]

1 May 2003

• 00:51   Re: [SQL] 7.3 analyze & vacuum analyze problem Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 13:57   Re: profiling plpgsql functions.. Rajesh Kumar Mallah

2 May 2003

• 10:27   Re: [SQL] 7.3 analyze & vacuum analyze problem Achilleus Mantzios
• 11:54   Query Priority Peter Childs
• 13:00   Re: [SQL] 7.3 analyze & vacuum analyze problem Achilleus Mantzios
• 13:05   Re: Query Priority Andrew Sullivan
• 13:23   Re: Query Priority Tom Lane
• 17:53   Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Chad Thompson
• 19:11   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Josh Berkus
• 19:15   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) scott.marlowe
• 19:53   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Chad Thompson
• 20:31   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) scott.marlowe
• 21:11   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Josh Berkus
• 21:28   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) scott.marlowe

3 May 2003

• 02:18   Re: Query Priority Ron Mayer
• 04:51   looking for large dataset Antoine
• 04:56   NOT IN doesn't use index? Becky Neville
• 06:57   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) D'Arcy J.M. Cain
• 07:03   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Shridhar Daithankar
• 07:16   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Shridhar Daithankar
• 09:05   Re: looking for large dataset Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 13:53   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? Andrew Sullivan
• 14:13   Re: looking for large dataset Becky Neville
• 16:41   why is the db so slow? Becky Neville
• 16:58   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? (fwd) Becky Neville
• 17:32   Re: why is the db so slow? Joe Conway
• 17:34   Re: why is the db so slow? Josh Berkus
• 17:36   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? (fwd) Josh Berkus
• 17:36   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? (fwd) Joe Conway
• 18:08   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? (fwd) Becky Neville
• 18:31   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? (fwd) Joe Conway
• 18:57   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? (fwd) Becky Neville
• 19:25   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? (fwd) Joe Conway
• 19:30   Re: why is the db so slow? brew@theMode.com
• 19:40   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Ron Johnson
• 20:17   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? (fwd) Rod Taylor

4 May 2003

• 01:30   Suggestions wanted for 7.2.4 query Josh Berkus
• 03:06   Re: NOT IN doesn't use index? (fwd) Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 03:42   Re: Suggestions wanted for 7.2.4 query Tom Lane
• 15:07   Re: Suggestions wanted for 7.2.4 query Josh Berkus
• 15:22   Re: More tablescanning fun Jim C. Nasby
• 16:23   Re: Suggestions wanted for 7.2.4 query Tom Lane
• 17:00   Re: Suggestions wanted for 7.2.4 query Josh Berkus

5 May 2003

• 06:27   Wrong index usage in 7.3.2 Achilleus Mantzios
• 12:35   Re: [SQL] Indices are not used by the optimizer Achilleus Mantzios
• 15:36   Re: looking for large dataset scott.marlowe
• 15:42   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) scott.marlowe
• 15:48   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) scott.marlowe
• 16:59   Re: Suggestions wanted for 7.2.4 query Josh Berkus
• 18:20   Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Josh Berkus
• 18:27   Re: Suggestions wanted for 7.2.4 query Josh Berkus
• 20:55   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Ron Johnson
• 21:32   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) scott.marlowe

6 May 2003

• 03:25   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Tom Lane
• 03:36   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Josh Berkus
• 03:45   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Tom Lane
• 05:59   Select on timestamp-day slower than timestamp alone Reiner Dassing
• 06:25   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing Peter Childs
• 10:04   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Ron Johnson
• 10:49   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, Ron Johnson
• 12:04   Re: Select on timestamp-day slower than timestamp alone Richard Huxton
• 12:07   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Jim C. Nasby
• 12:10   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Jim C. Nasby
• 12:45   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Tom Lane
• 12:59   Re: Select on timestamp-day slower than timestamp alone Tom Lane
• 13:00   Re: Select on timestamp-day slower than timestamp alone Reiner Dassing
• 13:05   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 13:39   Re: [ADMIN] A query with performance problems. Stephan Szabo
• 17:23   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) scott.marlowe
• 17:33   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing Dennis Björklund
• 18:33   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) Ron Johnson
• 19:52   Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID) scott.marlowe

7 May 2003

• 04:08   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Jim C. Nasby
• 04:20   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Tom Lane
• 06:37   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing Dennis Björklund
• 10:29   An unresolved performance problem. Achilleus Mantzios
• 12:36   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing improvement Jim C. Nasby
• 12:40   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Hannu Krosing
• 13:05   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Achilleus Mantzios
• 13:19   Re: [HACKERS] Hypothetical suggestions for planner, indexing Tom Lane
• 14:27   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Josh Berkus
• 14:37   Re: [SQL] An unresolved performance problem. Mendola Gaetano
• 14:54   Re: An unresolved performance problem. scott.marlowe
• 15:07   Yet another 'why does it not use my index' question. Ryan
• 15:27   Re: Yet another 'why does it not use my index' question. Bruno Wolff III
• 15:39   Re: Yet another 'why does it not use my index' question. Ryan
• 15:57   Re: Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. Josh Berkus
• 17:43   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Manfred Koizar
• 18:13   Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Lucas Adamski
• 18:36   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Stephan Szabo
• 18:43   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Stephan Szabo
• 18:46   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Patrick Hatcher
• 19:23   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Manfred Koizar
• 21:29   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Lucas Adamski
• 21:38   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Lucas Adamski
• 21:50   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Lucas Adamski
• 21:58   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Stephan Szabo
• 22:52   Re: [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. Randall Lucas
• 22:54   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Manfred Koizar

8 May 2003

• 03:13   Re: [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. Tom Lane
• 03:57   Re: [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. Sean Chittenden
• 06:44   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Achilleus Mantzios
• 10:20   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Andrew Sullivan
• 13:42   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Tom Lane
• 13:45   Re: [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. johnnnnnn
• 14:36   Type casting and indexes David Olbersen
• 15:13   Re: Type casting and indexes Stephan Szabo
• 15:25   Re: Type casting and indexes Tom Lane
• 15:30   Re: [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance scott.marlowe
• 21:35   Re: Type casting and indexes Tom Lane

9 May 2003

• 06:55   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Achilleus Mantzios
• 11:31   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Tom Lane
• 12:06   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Achilleus Mantzios
• 12:08   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Tom Lane
• 12:17   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Achilleus Mantzios
• 12:30   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Tom Lane
• 13:08   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Achilleus Mantzios
• 13:19   Re: An unresolved performance problem. Achilleus Mantzios

10 May 2003

• 14:58   Re: [GENERAL] realtime data inserts Ericson Smith
• 15:00   Re: [GENERAL] realtime data inserts Tom Lane
• 16:08   Re: [GENERAL] realtime data inserts Jim C. Nasby

11 May 2003

• 12:15   Yet another question about not use on indexes Xevi Serrats
• 13:08   Re: Yet another question about not use on indexes Richard Huxton
• 13:15   Re: Yet another question about not use on indexes Tom Lane

12 May 2003

• 06:31   Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? Lucas Adamski
• 10:45   PERFORMANCE and SIZE Alfranio Junior
• 13:51   Re: [GENERAL] realtime data inserts Adam Siegel
• 14:49   Re: PERFORMANCE and SIZE Josh Berkus
• 14:56   Re: [GENERAL] realtime data inserts Steve Crawford
• 18:02   How are null's stored? Jim C. Nasby
• 19:45   Re: How are null's stored? Josh Berkus
• 19:53   Re: How are null's stored? Ryan
• 20:04   Re: How are null's stored? Andrew Sullivan
• 21:47   Re: How are null's stored? Josh Berkus
• 22:19   Re: How are null's stored? Stephan Szabo
• 22:50   Re: How are null's stored? Tom Lane
• 22:50   partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? csajl
• 23:07   [repost] partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? csajl
• 23:14   Re: [repost] partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? Josh Berkus
• 23:47   Re: [repost] partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? csajl

13 May 2003

• 01:14   Re: PERFORMANCE and SIZE Nikolaus Dilger
• 02:32   Re: [repost] partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? Josh Berkus
• 02:47   Re: [repost] partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? Stephan Szabo
• 02:58   Re: [repost] partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? csajl
• 03:03   Re: [repost] partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? csajl
• 09:58   Re: [repost] partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? Jim C. Nasby
• 11:31   Re: PERFORMANCE and SIZE Alfranio Junior
• 13:46   Re: [repost] partial index / funxtional idx or bad sql? Tom Lane
• 15:15   Re: PERFORMANCE and SIZE Josh Berkus
• 18:45   Re: How are null's stored? Stephan Szabo
• 19:16   Re: How are null's stored? Tom Lane
• 20:05   Re: PERFORMANCE and SIZE scott.marlowe
• 20:31   Finding filenames for tables Jamie Lawrence
• 20:52   Re: Finding filenames for tables Andreas Pflug
• 20:55   Re: How are null's stored? -- Some numbers Jim C. Nasby
• 22:11   Re: Finding filenames for tables Jamie Lawrence

14 May 2003

• 22:09   constraint with reference to the same table Victor Yegorov
• 22:28   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Stephan Szabo
• 22:51   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Rudi Starcevic
• 23:02   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Rudi Starcevic
• 23:10   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Victor Yegorov
• 23:46   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Stephan Szabo
• 23:47   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Rudi Starcevic
• 23:49   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Stephan Szabo

15 May 2003

• 00:01   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Victor Yegorov
• 00:04   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Rudi Starcevic
• 00:23   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Stephan Szabo
• 00:24   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Stephan Szabo
• 00:43   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Rudi Starcevic
• 00:46   INNER JOIN vs WHERE T. Alex Beamish
• 00:55   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Victor Yegorov
• 01:02   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Rudi Starcevic
• 01:10   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Rudi Starcevic
• 01:18   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Victor Yegorov
• 01:24   Re: constraint with reference to the same table Rudi Starcevic
• 01:25   Re: INNER JOIN vs WHERE Tom Lane
• 02:30   Re: PERFORMANCE and SIZE Bruce Momjian
• 02:40   Re: PERFORMANCE and SIZE Rudi Starcevic
• 02:41   nested select query failing amol
• 02:49   Re: nested select query failing Victor Yegorov
• 03:24   Re: nested select query failing Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 09:39   FW: [ADMIN] Out of disk space- error code Anagha Joshi
• 10:57   Re: nested select query failing SZUCS Gábor
• 11:38   Re: FW: [ADMIN] Out of disk space- error code Andrew Sullivan
• 13:57   Re: nested select query failing Stephan Szabo
• 14:09   Re: [ADMIN] nested query too expensive Stephan Szabo

19 May 2003

• 21:12   postgres on a beowulf? (AMD)opteron? george young

20 May 2003

• 08:26   Re: postgres on a beowulf? (AMD)opteron? Hannu Krosing
• 09:05   Re: nested select query failing amol
• 10:28   Re: postgres on a beowulf? (AMD)opteron? Andrew Sullivan
• 11:28   7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Eugene Fokin
• 12:06   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Victor Yegorov
• 12:09   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Rod Taylor
• 12:28   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Eugene Fokin
• 13:04   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Victor Yegorov
• 14:18   Re: nested select query failing Tom Lane
• 14:34   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Eugene Fokin
• 14:49   Re: postgres on a beowulf? (AMD)opteron? scott.marlowe
• 14:55   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Victor Yegorov
• 15:31   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Josh Berkus
• 15:32   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 -- Ooops Josh Berkus
• 15:36   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Josh Berkus
• 15:40   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Tom Lane
• 16:34   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Tom Lane

21 May 2003

• 06:09   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Eugene Fokin
• 06:13   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Eugene Fokin
• 06:25   Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 Eugene Fokin
• 09:00   Re: nested select query failing amol
• 14:02   Re: postgres on a beowulf? (AMD)opteron? Ron Johnson
• 15:24   Re: postgres on a beowulf? (AMD)opteron? scott.marlowe

22 May 2003

• 14:30   ugly query slower in 7.3, even slower after vacuum full analyze SZŰCS Gábor
• 16:17   Re: ugly query slower in 7.3, even slower after vacuum full analyze Tom Lane
• 17:06   Re: ugly query slower in 7.3, even slower after vacuum full analyze Josh Berkus
• 17:14   Re: ugly query slower in 7.3, even slower after vacuum full analyze SZŰCS Gábor
• 21:17   Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? Ernest E Vogelsinger
• 22:31   Re: postgres on a beowulf? (AMD)opteron? Bruce Momjian
• 23:46   Re: [GENERAL] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? scott.marlowe

23 May 2003

• 00:12   Re: [ADMIN] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? Stephan Szabo
• 00:17   Re: [ADMIN] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? Tom Lane
• 00:47   Re: [ADMIN] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? Ernest E Vogelsinger
• 08:12   Re: [ADMIN] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? Stephan Szabo
• 13:38   Re: postgres on a beowulf? (AMD)opteron? Shridhar Daithankar
• 15:50   Re: postgres on a beowulf? (AMD)opteron? scott.marlowe
• 15:59   Re: [GENERAL] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? Reece Hart

27 May 2003

• 18:09   Wildcard searches & performance question Grega Bremec
• 18:37   Re: Wildcard searches & performance question Andrew Sullivan
• 18:56   Re: Wildcard searches & performance question Josh Berkus
• 19:03   Re: Wildcard searches & performance question scott.marlowe
• 19:06   Re: Wildcard searches & performance question Rod Taylor

28 May 2003

• 10:28   ... Peter Lavender
• 11:51   IN list processing performance (yet again) Dave Tenny
• 12:17   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Shridhar Daithankar
• 12:19   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Andreas Pflug
• 13:31   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Mario Weilguni
• 13:54   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Stephan Szabo
• 14:46   >24 hour restore Chad Thompson
• 15:12   Re: >24 hour restore scott.marlowe
• 15:24   Re: >24 hour restore Andrew Sullivan
• 16:58   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Dave Tenny
• 17:00   Re: >24 hour restore Chad Thompson
• 17:08   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Dave Tenny
• 17:14   Re: >24 hour restore Andrew Sullivan
• 17:17   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Dave Tenny
• 17:30   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Mario Weilguni
• 17:37   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Bruno Wolff III
• 17:39   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Bruno Wolff III
• 18:57   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Dave Tenny
• 19:01   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Dave Tenny
• 19:13   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Dave Tenny
• 19:22   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Bruno Wolff III
• 19:26   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Bruno Wolff III
• 19:53   Re: Wildcard searches & performance question Grega Bremec
• 20:30   recursive srf Matthew Nuzum
• 22:02   Re: Wildcard searches & performance question scott.marlowe
• 22:44   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Tom Lane

29 May 2003

• 00:19   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Dave Tenny
• 00:46   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Tom Lane
• 00:47   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 00:53   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 05:15   Re: >24 hour restore Victor Yegorov
• 09:53   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Bruno Wolff III
• 11:48   Re: IN list processing performance (yet again) Dave Tenny
• 12:58   Select query takes long to execute Kevin Schroeder
• 13:09   Query problem fixed Kevin Schroeder
• 13:25   Re: Select query takes long to execute Shridhar Daithankar
• 13:28   Re: Query problem fixed SZUCS Gábor
• 13:49   Re: Query problem fixed Tom Lane
• 15:18   Re: Select query takes long to execute scott.marlowe

30 May 2003

• 01:44   Re: Select query takes long to execute Nikolaus Dilger
• 07:59   Re: Select query takes long to execute SZUCS Gábor
• 08:37   Table Relationships Jeandre du Toit
• 09:08   Re: Table Relationships Victor Yegorov
• 11:10   Re: Table Relationships Bruno Wolff III
• 11:12   Re: Select query takes long to execute Bruno Wolff III
• 13:25   Hardware advice Adam Witney
• 13:31   Re: Table Relationships Jeandre du Toit
• 13:44   Re: Hardware advice Andrew Sullivan
• 14:42   Re: Hardware advice scott.marlowe
• 15:07   Re: Table Relationships Josh Berkus
• 15:22   Re: Table Relationships Jeandre du Toit
• 15:30   Spam sent to addresses subscribed to psql-performance pgsql-performance@sysd.com
• 15:39   Re: Table Relationships Andrew Sullivan
• 15:57   Re: Hardware advice Adam Witney
• 16:03   Re: Table Relationships Josh Berkus
• 16:34   Re: Hardware advice scott.marlowe
• 16:37   Re: Table Relationships scott.marlowe
• 17:00   Re: Hardware advice Roman Fail
• 17:18   Re: Table Relationships Andrew Sullivan
• 18:15   Re: Hardware advice Will LaShell
• 18:43   Re: Hardware advice scott.marlowe
• 18:50   Re: Hardware advice scott.marlowe
• 18:55   Re: Table Relationships Josh Berkus
• 19:33   Enabling and Disabling Sequencial Scan Yusuf
• 20:03   Re: Enabling and Disabling Sequencial Scan scott.marlowe

31 May 2003

• 01:32   Re: [GENERAL] Yet Another (Simple) Case of Index not used Bruce Momjian
• 02:29   Re: Enabling and Disabling Sequencial Scan Robert Creager
• 14:07   Re: Enabling and Disabling Sequencial Scan Nikolaus Dilger
• 15:27   why Sequencial Scan when selecting on primary key of table? Brian Tarbox
• 16:02   Re: why Sequencial Scan when selecting on primary key of table? Andrew Sullivan
• 16:14   Re: why Sequencial Scan when selecting on primary key of table? Tom Lane
• 16:43   Re: why Sequencial Scan when selecting on primary key of table? Brian Tarbox
• 16:51   Re: why Sequencial Scan when selecting on primary key of table? Rod Taylor
• 16:55   Re: why Sequencial Scan when selecting on primary key of table? Tom Lane
• 17:02   Re: why Sequencial Scan when selecting on primary key of table? Andrew Sullivan
• 17:12   Re: why Sequencial Scan when selecting on primary key of table? Tom Lane