Mailing lists [pgsql-performance]

1 December 2003

• 09:14   Dump restoration via archive files Kamalraj Singh Madhan
• 12:10   Various Questions Evil Azrael
• 12:27   Re: Various Questions Shridhar Daithankar
• 12:45   My indexes aren't being used (according to EXPLAIN) Erik Norvelle
• 13:01   Re: Various Questions Andrew Sullivan
• 13:04   Re: My indexes aren't being used (according to EXPLAIN) Andrew Sullivan
• 13:18   Re: Dump restoration via archive files Jeff
• 13:29   Re: cross table indexes or something? Jeremiah Jahn
• 14:25   Re: Dump restoration via archive files Stephan Szabo
• 14:26   Re: My indexes aren't being used (according to EXPLAIN) Erik Norvelle
• 15:01   Re: cross table indexes or something? Richard Huxton
• 15:26   Re: cross table indexes or something? Arjen van der Meijden
• 16:31   Re: Followup - expression (functional) index use in joins Roger Ging
• 17:05   Re: Followup - expression (functional) index use in joins Tom Lane
• 18:48   Re: cross table indexes or something? Josh Berkus
• 18:58   Various Questions Evil Azrael
• 18:58   Re: Followup - expression (functional) index use in joins Roger Ging
• 20:44   A question on the query planner Jared Carr
• 21:25   Is clustering possible to enhance the performance? LIANHE SHAO
• 21:38   Re: Is clustering possible to enhance the performance? Bruce Momjian
• 23:46   Re: A question on the query planner Tom Lane

2 December 2003

• 14:55   Update performance ... is 200,000 updates per hour what I should expect? Erik Norvelle
• 15:30   Re: Update performance ... is 200,000 updates per hour Stephan Szabo
• 15:34   Re: Update performance ... is 200,000 updates per hour what I should expect? Tom Lane
• 15:41   Re: Update performance ... is 200,000 updates per hour what I should expect? Greg Stark
• 16:18   Re: A question on the query planner Robert Treat
• 16:55   Re: A question on the query planner Jared Carr
• 18:01   Re: A question on the query planner Greg Stark
• 18:08   Re: cross table indexes or something? Jeremiah Jahn
• 18:13   Re: A question on the query planner Jared Carr
• 18:28   Re: cross table indexes or something? Josh Berkus
• 19:11   Re: A question on the query planner Greg Stark
• 19:28   Re: A question on the query planner Jared Carr
• 19:38   autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Vivek Khera
• 20:58   Re: cross table indexes or something? Neil Conway
• 21:32   Re: A question on the query planner Greg Stark
• 21:44   Re: A question on the query planner Greg Stark
• 22:18   Re: cross table indexes or something? Josh Berkus
• 22:37   Re: cross table indexes or something? Neil Conway
• 22:51   Re: A question on the query planner Tom Lane

3 December 2003

• 00:33   Re: A question on the query planner Greg Stark
• 00:46   Re: cross table indexes or something? Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 01:00   Re: cross table indexes or something? Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 01:23   Minimum hardware requirements for Postgresql db CHEWTC@ap.nec.com.sg
• 02:53   Re: A question on the query planner Tom Lane
• 03:58   Re: Minimum hardware requirements for Postgresql db Christopher Browne
• 16:49   Re: A question on the query planner Tom Lane
• 17:27   Re: A question on the query planner Jared Carr
• 17:41   Re: Minimum hardware requirements for Postgresql db scott.marlowe
• 18:24   Re: Minimum hardware requirements for Postgresql db Greg Stark
• 18:32   Re: Minimum hardware requirements for Postgresql db Al Hulaton
• 18:33   Re: A question on the query planner Greg Stark
• 20:23   Re: Update performance ... Recommended configuration changes? erik@norvelle.net
• 20:33   Re: Update performance ... Recommended configuration Rod Taylor
• 20:41   Has anyone run on the new G5 yet Sean Shanny
• 20:54   Re: Has anyone run on the new G5 yet Sean Shanny
• 21:13   Re: Has anyone run on the new G5 yet Eric Soroos
• 21:32   sequence overhead Robert Treat
• 21:35   Re: Has anyone run on the new G5 yet Fred Moyer
• 22:18   Re: A question on the query planner Bruce Momjian
• 22:22   Re: A question on the query planner Jared Carr
• 22:56   Re: A question on the query planner Gaetano Mendola
• 22:57   Re: Has anyone run on the new G5 yet Gaetano Mendola
• 23:25   Re: Has anyone run on the new G5 yet Sean Shanny

4 December 2003

• 02:10   Re: Minimum hardware requirements for Postgresql db CHEWTC@ap.nec.com.sg
• 04:41   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Matthew T. O'Connor
• 07:21   Re: Has anyone run on the new G5 yet Paul Tuckfield
• 11:48   Async Query Processing on Solaris Passynkov, Vadim
• 12:28   Re: Minimum hardware requirements for Postgresql db Christopher Browne
• 14:21   Re: [ADMIN] Index not used. WHY? Stephan Szabo
• 15:07   tuning questions Jack Coates
• 15:34   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Vivek Khera
• 16:00   Re: tuning questions Jeff
• 16:00   Re: tuning questions Josh Berkus
• 16:10   Re: tuning questions Rob Fielding
• 16:28   Re: Has anyone run on the new G5 yet William Yu
• 16:46   Re: tuning questions scott.marlowe
• 16:58   Re: tuning questions Dror Matalon
• 17:08   Re: tuning questions Jord Tanner
• 17:12   Re: tuning questions Andrew Sullivan
• 17:17   Re: tuning questions Josh Berkus
• 17:31   Re: tuning questions scott.marlowe
• 17:36   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Gaetano Mendola
• 17:58   Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 18:17   Re: tuning questions Jack Coates
• 18:17   Re: tuning questions Eric Soroos
• 18:24   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Jeff
• 18:34   Re: tuning questions Josh Berkus
• 18:37   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Vivek Khera
• 18:46   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Vivek Khera
• 18:55   Re: tuning questions Jack Coates
• 18:55   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 19:44   Re: tuning questions Jack Coates
• 19:47   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 19:50   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT William Yu
• 19:53   Re: tuning questions Richard Huxton
• 19:55   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Richard Huxton
• 20:00   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Matthew T. O'Connor
• 20:20   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Vivek Khera
• 20:22   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Vivek Khera
• 20:25   Re: tuning questions Josh Berkus
• 20:26   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an Larry Rosenman
• 20:29   Re: tuning questions scott.marlowe
• 20:37   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an Vivek Khera
• 21:13   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 21:38   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Richard Huxton
• 21:46   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Richard Huxton
• 22:00   Re: tuning questions Eric Soroos
• 22:17   Re: tuning questions Jack Coates
• 22:20   Re: tuning questions Jack Coates
• 22:48   Re: tuning questions Richard Huxton
• 23:33   Re: tuning questions Jack Coates

5 December 2003

• 00:45   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 01:08   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 01:14   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 03:53   Re: tuning questions Eric Soroos
• 07:09   Re: [ADMIN] Index not used. WHY? Andrei Bintintan
• 07:40   Re: [ADMIN] Index not used. WHY? Shridhar Daithankar
• 08:13   Re: tuning questions Thierry Missimilly
• 09:08   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Richard Huxton
• 11:39   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 11:50   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Shridhar Daithankar
• 12:13   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 12:24   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Richard Huxton
• 12:52   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Shridhar Daithankar
• 14:35   Re: [ADMIN] Index not used. WHY? Stephan Szabo
• 15:48   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 15:53   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Ivar Zarans
• 16:06   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Mike C. Fletcher
• 16:12   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Mike C. Fletcher
• 16:27   Re: tuning questions Josh Berkus
• 16:29   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Greg Stark
• 18:29   Slightly OT -- Xeon versus Opteron Comparison William Yu
• 20:00   query using cpu nearly 100%, why? LIANHE SHAO
• 20:52   Help tracking down problem with inserts slowing down... Steve Wampler
• 22:39   Re: Help tracking down problem with inserts slowing Neil Conway

6 December 2003

• 00:23   Re: tuning questions Jack Coates
• 01:55   Re: Help tracking down problem with inserts slowing down... Robert Treat
• 12:19   Re: Has anyone run on the new G5 yet Bruce Momjian
• 16:09   Pgbench results Rob Sell
• 16:47   Re: query using cpu nearly 100%, why? Richard Huxton
• 18:42   Re: query using cpu nearly 100%, why? Neil Conway
• 18:54   Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT Neil Conway

7 December 2003

• 13:28   Re: Help tracking down problem with inserts slowing down... Steve Wampler
• 13:53   Re: Help tracking down problem with inserts slowing down... Steve Wampler
• 15:54   Re: Help tracking down problem with inserts slowing down... Tom Lane
• 16:29   Re: Help tracking down problem with inserts slowing Steve Wampler
• 20:16   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an Bruce Momjian
• 23:47   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Gaetano Mendola

8 December 2003

• 00:29   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Christopher Browne
• 04:28   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Matthew T. O'Connor
• 14:15   Re: Help tracking down problem with inserts slowing Steve Wampler
• 14:36   Re: Help tracking down problem with inserts slowing Tom Lane
• 16:44   Re: tuning questions Jack Coates
• 17:41   Re: autovacuum daemon stops doing work after about an hour Vivek Khera
• 18:21   Re: tuning questions Tom Lane

9 December 2003

• 07:32   Re: Problem with insert into select... Neil Conway
• 15:58   Re: tuning questions Jack Coates
• 16:08   Re: tuning questions Matt Clark
• 16:36   Re: tuning questions Josh Berkus
• 18:57   Slow UPDATE, INSERT OK Ivar Zarans
• 19:00   TRUNCATE veeeery slow compared to DELETE in 7.4 Hartmut Raschick
• 19:03   Re: [linux-lvm] RE: [ADMIN] backup/restore - another Murthy Kambhampaty
• 19:05   Async Query Processing on Solaris Passynkov, Vadim
• 22:21   Index problem or function problem? LIANHE SHAO

10 December 2003

• 04:56   Solaris Performance (Again) Mark Kirkwood
• 12:54   Re: Solaris Performance (Again) Jeff
• 16:20   Re: TRUNCATE veeeery slow compared to DELETE in 7.4 Josh Berkus
• 18:16   Re: Solaris Performance (Again) Neil Conway
• 18:30   ... nbarraza@uolsinectis.com.ar
• 18:55   Re: TRUNCATE veeeery slow compared to DELETE in 7.4 Tom Lane
• 19:35   Re: Stephan Szabo

11 December 2003

• 03:22   Performance problems with a higher number of clients Alfranio Correia Junior
• 05:04   Re: Solaris Performance (Again) Mark Kirkwood
• 05:09   Re: Solaris Performance (Again) Mark Kirkwood
• 05:37   Re: Performance problems with a higher number of clients Shridhar Daithankar
• 12:29   Re: Performance problems with a higher number of clients Jeff
• 13:59   Re: Performance problems with a higher number of clients Tom Lane
• 15:01   hints in Postgres? sandra ruiz
• 15:22   Re: hints in Postgres? Pavel Stehule
• 15:46   Command nbarraza@uolsinectis.com.ar
• 16:00   Re: hints in Postgres? Christopher Browne
• 19:20   Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server Jeff Bohmer
• 19:28   Re: hints in Postgres? Bruno Wolff III
• 20:00   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server William Yu
• 21:02   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server Jeff Bohmer
• 22:08   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server scott.marlowe
• 23:00   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server William Yu

12 December 2003

• 00:17   Measuring execution time for sql called from PL/pgSQL Aram Kananov
• 01:35   Re: Performance problems with a higher number of clients Alfranio Tavares Correia Junior
• 05:36   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server Shridhar Daithankar
• 05:50   fsync method checking Bruce Momjian
• 06:47   Re: Measuring execution time for sql called from PL/pgSQL Tomasz Myrta
• 07:28   Query plan - now what? David Shadovitz
• 08:14   Re: Query plan - now what? Shridhar Daithankar
• 09:49   Re: TRUNCATE veeeery slow compared to DELETE in 7.4 Hartmut Raschick
• 11:40   ODBC Driver generates a too big "windows swap file" and it's too slow Rhaoni Chiu Pereira
• 14:34   Re: Query plan - now what? Tom Lane
• 14:47   Re: Query plan - now what? David Shadovitz
• 15:13   Re: [ADMIN] ODBC Driver generates a too big "windows swap file" and scott.marlowe
• 15:16   Tables Without OIDS and its effect Sai Hertz And Control Systems
• 15:53   Re: Query plan - now what? Tom Lane
• 15:59   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server William Yu
• 17:05   Performance related to size of tables nbarraza@uolsinectis.com.ar
• 20:11   Re: Performance related to size of tables Mark Kirkwood
• 20:29   Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking Tom Lane
• 21:29   Update on putting WAL on ramdisk/ William Yu
• 21:37   Re: Update on putting WAL on ramdisk/ Russell Garrett
• 21:59   Re: Update on putting WAL on ramdisk/ William Yu
• 22:11   Re: Tables Without OIDS and its effect Neil Conway

13 December 2003

• 09:34   Re: Tables Without OIDS and its effect Sai Hertz And Control Systems
• 17:39   a lot of problems with pg 7.4 Kari Lavikka
• 21:57   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server Jeff Bohmer
• 22:01   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server Jeff Bohmer

14 December 2003

• 04:42   Re: Tuning for mid-size server Bruce Momjian
• 04:44   Update performance doc Bruce Momjian
• 06:24   Re: Query plan - now what? David Shadovitz
• 08:55   Re: a lot of problems with pg 7.4 Tarhon-Onu Victor
• 16:14   Re: a lot of problems with pg 7.4 Dennis Bjorklund
• 16:56   Re: Tuning for mid-size server Andrew Sullivan
• 21:53   Re: Tables Without OIDS and its effect Tom Lane

15 December 2003

• 01:10   Re: Tables Without OIDS and its effect Neil Conway
• 03:17   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server Andrew G. Hammond
• 04:30   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server Christopher Browne
• 15:38   Re: Hardware suggestions for Linux/PGSQL server Jeff Bohmer
• 16:01   Unsubscribe Rhaoni Chiu Pereira
• 17:06   Re: Index problem or function problem? Tom Lane
• 17:22   Re: TRUNCATE veeeery slow compared to DELETE in 7.4 Tom Lane

16 December 2003

• 14:42   Postgres respond after toomany times to a query view Claudia D'amato
• 15:57   Re: a lot of problems with pg 7.4 scott.marlowe
• 16:12   Nested loop performance Nick Fankhauser
• 20:07   Why is VACUUM ANALYZE so slow? David Shadovitz
  20:08   Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking Manfred Spraul
  20:08   Optimizing FK & PK performance... Sean P. Thomas
  20:08   Excessive rows/tuples seriously degrading query performance Chadwick, Russell
  20:13   Re: Measuring execution time for sql called from PL/pgSQL David Shadovitz
  20:15   Nested loop question Nick Fankhauser - Doxpop
  20:15   Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
  20:29   Re: Excessive rows/tuples seriously degrading query Hannu Krosing
  21:48   Re: Optimizing FK & PK performance... Neil Conway
  21:51   Re: Why is VACUUM ANALYZE
  so slow? Neil Conway
  22:50   update slows down in pl/pgsql function Jenny Zhang
  22:55   Re: [GENERAL] update slows down in pl/pgsql function Stephan Szabo
  22:56   Re: Nested loop performance Richard Poole
  23:05   Re: [GENERAL] update slows down in pl/pgsql function Jenny Zhang

  17 December 2003

  • 00:14   Re: Optimizing FK & PK performance... Christopher Kings-Lynne
  • 00:17   Re: Nested loop performance Stephan Szabo
  • 04:30   Why is restored database faster? David Shadovitz
  • 04:31   Re: Why is VACUUM ANALYZE
  so slow? David Shadovitz
  05:00   Re: Why is restored database faster? Neil Conway
  05:31   Re: Why is restored database faster? Shridhar Daithankar
  05:43   Re: Why is restored database faster? Dennis Bjorklund
  08:52   Re: Nested loop question Richard Huxton
  14:26   Re: Nested loop performance Nick Fankhauser
  14:26   Re: Nested loop question Nick Fankhauser
  14:27   Re: Nested loop performance Nick Fankhauser
  17:35   Re: Excessive rows/tuples seriously degrading query Tom Lane
  18:57   Adding RAM: seeking advice & warnings of hidden "gotchas" Nick Fankhauser
  20:39   Re: Adding RAM: seeking advice & warnings of hidden "gotchas" Eric Soroos
  21:19   Re: Adding RAM: seeking advice & warnings of hidden "gotchas" Matt Clark

  18 December 2003

  • 03:00   Re: Why is restored database faster? David Shadovitz
  • 05:48   Re: Why is restored database faster? Shridhar Daithankar
  • 14:13   Re: Why is restored database faster? Dennis Bjorklund
  • 17:44   why do optimizer parameters have to be set manually? Marinos J. Yannikos
  • 18:57   Re: why do optimizer parameters have to be set manually? Tom Lane
  • 19:31   Re: why do optimizer parameters have to be set manually? Christopher Browne
  • 22:19   is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes with a like clause Dave Cramer

  19 December 2003

  • 00:34   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes Christopher Kings-Lynne
  • 02:09   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes Dave Cramer
  • 02:31   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes with a like clause Christopher Browne
  • 02:37   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes Stephan Szabo
  • 02:44   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes Tom Lane
  • 08:51   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes Dave Cramer
  • 12:52   Re: why do optimizer parameters have to be set manually? Marinos J. Yannikos
  • 13:39   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes Tom Lane
  • 14:08   Re: why do optimizer parameters have to be set manually? Tom Lane
  • 15:01   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes Erki Kaldjärv
  • 17:06   Re: why do optimizer parameters have to be set manually? William Yu

  22 December 2003

  • 09:52   "select max/count(id)" not using index Ryszard Lach
  • 09:57   Re: "select max/count(id)" not using index Christopher Kings-Lynne
  • 10:03   Re: "select max/count(id)" not using index Pavel Stehule
  • 10:04   Re: "select max/count(id)" not using index Tomasz Myrta
  • 14:29   Re: "select max/count(id)" not using index Evil Azrael
  • 19:38   Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
  • 19:38   general peformance question Conny Thimren
  • 19:39   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes Doug McNaught
  • 19:39   general performance question Conny Thimren
  • 19:39   postgresql performance on linux port Michael Guerin
  • 19:47   Re: general peformance question Rod Taylor
  • 21:33   Re: postgresql performance on linux port Tom Lane
  • 21:50   Re: general peformance question scott.marlowe

  24 December 2003

  • 12:59   Re: is it possible to get the optimizer to use indexes Dave Cramer
  • 23:53   mnogosearch under 7.4 ... Marc G. Fournier

  25 December 2003

  • 00:06   Re: postgresql performance on linux port Michael Guerin
  • 00:06    Michael Rothschild
  • 01:48   Re: Christopher Kings-Lynne
  • 15:29   Re: Tom Lane

  26 December 2003

  • 23:12   What's faster? Keith Bottner
  • 23:49   Re: What's faster? Tom Lane

  27 December 2003

  • 00:07   Re: What's faster? Mike Nolan
  • 03:01   Re: What's faster? Tom Lane
  • 09:52   Re: What's faster? D'Arcy J.M. Cain
  • 17:31   Re: What's faster? Tom Lane

  29 December 2003

  • 15:36   Question about difference in performance of 2 queries on large table Sean Shanny
  • 15:49   Re: Question about difference in performance of 2 queries on large table Tom Lane
  • 15:50   Re: Question about difference in performance of 2 queries Dennis Bjorklund
  • 16:45   Re: Question about difference in performance of 2 queries Sean Shanny
  • 17:47   Re: Question about difference in performance of 2 queries Sean Shanny
  • 18:26   Re: Question about difference in performance of 2 queries Sean Shanny
  • 18:40   Re: Question about difference in performance of 2 queries Tom Lane
  • 18:53   Re: Question about difference in performance of 2 queries Sean Shanny
  • 19:34   deferred foreign keys Vivek Khera

  30 December 2003

  • 14:03   Re: Question about difference in performance of 2 queries Nicholas Shanny
  • 15:33   DELETE ... WHERE ctid IN (...) vs. Iteration Jonathan Gardner

  31 December 2003

  • 16:18   Re: deferred foreign keys Vivek Khera

  Есть вопросы? Напишите нам!

  Send

  Соглашаюсь с условиями обработки персональных данных

  I confirm that I have read and accepted PostgresPro’s Privacy Policy.
  
  I agree to get Postgres Pro discount offers and other marketing communications.
  ✖
  ×

  ×

  Everywhere Documentation Mailing list

  List: all lists pgsql-general pgsql-hackers buildfarm-members pgadmin-hackers pgadmin-support pgsql-admin pgsql-advocacy pgsql-announce pgsql-benchmarks pgsql-bugs pgsql-chat pgsql-cluster-hackers pgsql-committers pgsql-cygwin pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers-pitr pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-interfaces pgsql-jdbc pgsql-jobs pgsql-novice pgsql-odbc pgsql-patches pgsql-performance pgsql-php pgsql-pkg-debian pgsql-pkg-yum pgsql-ports pgsql-rrreviewers pgsql-ru-general pgsql-sql pgsql-students pgsql-testers pgsql-translators pgsql-www psycopg

  Period anytime within last day within last week within last month within last 6 months within last year

  Sort by date reverse date rank
  By continuing to browse this website, you agree to the use of cookies. Go to Privacy Policy. I accept cookies