Mailing lists [pgsql-performance]

1 June 2006

• 03:18   Re: App very unresponsive while performing simple update Jim C. Nasby
• 04:31   Re: App very unresponsive while performing simple update Greg Stark
• 11:54   vacuuming problems continued Antoine
• 15:06   Re: vacuuming problems continued Tom Lane
• 17:37   help me problems with pg_clog file Joao
• 18:04   Re: Bulk loading/merging Michael Artz

2 June 2006

• 07:41   Re: help me problems with pg_clog file Gourish Singbal
• 18:26   Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI 
• 18:40   Re: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI Scott Marlowe
• 18:41   Re: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI Mark Lewis
• 18:43   Re: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI Tom Lane
• 19:54   RES: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI 
• 20:14   Re: RES: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI Mark Lewis
• 20:37   RES: RES: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI 
• 20:44   Re: RES: RES: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI Mark Lewis
• 20:55   RES: RES: RES: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI 

3 June 2006

• 00:13   Re: RES: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI Mark Kirkwood
• 09:36   scaling up postgres fzied@planet.tn
• 09:44   Re: scaling up postgres Steinar H. Gunderson
• 09:57   Re: scaling up postgres PFC
• 10:52   Re: Répondre Steinar H. Gunderson
• 12:43   Re: scaling up postgres David Boreham
• 15:12   Re: scaling up postgres Tom Lane
• 15:18   Re: scaling up postgres David Boreham
• 15:36   Re: scaling up postgres Neil Saunders

4 June 2006

• 01:24   INSERT OR UPDATE WITHOUT SELECT wmiro@ig.com.br
• 01:24   Re: pg_dump issue Evgeny Gridasov
• 02:03   Re: RES: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI Bruce Momjian
• 02:23   Re: RES: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI Mark Kirkwood
• 07:40   Re: INSERT OR UPDATE WITHOUT SELECT A. Kretschmer
• 12:13   Re: Bulk loading/merging Ahmad Fajar
• 22:32   Re: psql -A (unaligned format) eats too much memory Zoltan Boszormenyi
• 22:34   psql -A (unaligned format) eats too much memory Zoltan Boszormenyi

5 June 2006

• 14:35   Re: How can I make this query faster (resend) Jim C. Nasby
• 14:44   Re: vacuuming problems continued Jim C. Nasby
• 14:48   Re: help me problems with pg_clog file Jim C. Nasby
• 15:04   Re: Bulk loading/merging Jim C. Nasby
• 19:17   Some queries starting to hang Chris Beecroft
• 19:29   How to force Postgres to use index on ILIKE Andrus
• 19:43   Re: Some queries starting to hang Andrew Sullivan
• 20:07   Re: Some queries starting to hang Tom Lane
• 20:39   Re: Some queries starting to hang Andrew Sullivan
• 20:39   Re: Some queries starting to hang Chris Beecroft
• 20:42   Re: vacuuming problems continued Andrew Sullivan
• 21:06   Re: Some queries starting to hang Tom Lane
• 21:27   Re: How to force Postgres to use index on ILIKE Josh Berkus
• 22:22   Re: Some queries starting to hang Chris Beecroft

6 June 2006

• 00:43   Problem: query becomes slow when calling a fast user defined function. Dan Libby
• 02:43   Re: Problem: query becomes slow when calling a fast user defined function. Tom Lane
• 09:58   Re: How to force Postgres to use index on ILIKE Andrus
• 14:24   Re: How to force Postgres to use index on ILIKE Tom Lane
• 14:39   Re: Some queries starting to hang Simon Riggs
• 14:45   Re: Some queries starting to hang Tom Lane
• 14:53   Re: Some queries starting to hang Simon Riggs
• 15:03   Re: Some queries starting to hang Jim C. Nasby
• 15:06   Re: Some queries starting to hang Tom Lane
• 15:14   Re: Some queries starting to hang Jim C. Nasby
• 15:21   Re: Some queries starting to hang A.M.
• 15:30   Re: Some queries starting to hang Andrew Sullivan
• 15:38   Re: Some queries starting to hang A.M.
• 15:38   Re: Some queries starting to hang Greg Stark
• 15:41   Re: Some queries starting to hang Tom Lane
• 16:20   Re: Some queries starting to hang Andrew Sullivan
• 17:46   Re: Some queries starting to hang Craig A. James
• 17:51   Re: Some queries starting to hang Craig A. James
• 17:54   Re: Some queries starting to hang Scott Marlowe
• 18:44   Re: vacuuming problems continued Mischa Sandberg
• 19:21   Re: vacuuming problems continued Joshua D. Drake
• 19:30   Re: vacuuming problems continued Mischa Sandberg
• 20:51   Re: Some queries starting to hang Jim C. Nasby
• 21:02   Re: Some queries starting to hang Scott Marlowe
• 21:11   Re: Some queries starting to hang Tom Lane
• 21:15   Re: Some queries starting to hang Scott Marlowe
• 23:27   Re: lowering priority automatically at connection Ron Mayer

7 June 2006

• 11:42   Re: Some queries starting to hang Simon Riggs
• 12:43   Regarding ALTER Command soni de
• 14:50   Re: Regarding ALTER Command Jim C. Nasby
• 19:58   Curious sorting puzzle Ivan Voras
• 20:52   Re: vacuuming problems continued Antoine
• 21:16   Re: Curious sorting puzzle Tom Lane
• 22:17   Re: vacuuming problems continued Jim C. Nasby
• 23:06   Re: Curious sorting puzzle Ivan Voras

8 June 2006

• 06:07   Re: Regarding ALTER Command soni de
• 06:10   Regarding pg_dump utility soni de
• 11:41   JOIN with inherited table ignores indexes Andreas Pflug
• 15:04   Re: Regarding ALTER Command Tom Lane
• 15:06   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Tom Lane
• 15:17   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Jim C. Nasby
• 15:22   Re: JOIN with inherited table ignores indexes Jim C. Nasby
• 15:42   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Geoffrey
• 16:06   Re: JOIN with inherited table ignores indexes Tom Lane
• 16:23   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Alvaro Herrera
• 16:33   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Andreas Pflug
• 16:35   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Jim C. Nasby
• 16:38   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Alvaro Herrera
• 16:42   Re: JOIN with inherited table ignores indexes Andreas Pflug
• 18:55   Why date index is not used Andrus
• 19:17   Re: Why date index is not used Tomas Vondra
• 19:20   Re: Why date index is not used Tomas Vondra
• 19:21   Re: Why date index is not used Tom Lane
• 20:07   Re: Why date index is not used Dave Dutcher
• 21:57   Re: Why date index is not used Jim C. Nasby
• 22:19   Re: Why date index is not used Tom Lane

9 June 2006

• 01:14   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 01:17   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 09:52   Re: Why date index is not used Andrus
• 09:52   Re: Why date index is not used Andrus
• 09:52   Re: Why date index is not used Andrus
• 12:29   pgsql_tmp and postgres settings Domenico - Sal. F.lli Riva
• 14:22   Re: Regarding pg_dump utility Paul S
• 15:54   Re: Why date index is not used Jim C. Nasby
• 16:00   Re: pgsql_tmp and postgres settings Jim C. Nasby
• 19:41   pg_xlog on data partition with BBU RAID Jim C. Nasby
• 20:21   Re: pg_xlog on data partition with BBU RAID Scott Marlowe

10 June 2006

• 02:29   FW: pg_xlog on data partition with BBU RAID Jim Nasby

11 June 2006

• 06:35   Variation between query runtimes John Top-k apad
• 17:19   function not called if part of aggregate Craig A. James
• 17:32   Re: function not called if part of aggregate Steinar H. Gunderson
• 17:39   Re: function not called if part of aggregate Tom Lane
• 17:48   Re: function not called if part of aggregate Jim C. Nasby
• 18:00   Re: function not called if part of aggregate Greg Stark
• 21:43   Re: scaling up postgres Steinar H. Gunderson
• 22:01   Re: scaling up postgres Mario Splivalo
• 23:21   Re: scaling up postgres Joshua D. Drake

12 June 2006

• 02:50   Re: Variation between query runtimes Qingqing Zhou
• 05:56   Re: pgsql_tmp and postgres settings Gourish Singbal
• 10:01   Re: scaling up postgres Sven Geisler
• 10:14   Re: scaling up postgres Alex Stapleton
• 11:21   Re: scaling up postgres Sven Geisler
• 14:39   Posrgres speed problem Ruben Rubio Rey
• 14:45   Re: Posrgres speed problem Dave Dutcher
• 14:59   Re: Posrgres speed problem Ruben Rubio Rey
• 15:02   Re: Posrgres speed problem Ruben Rubio Rey
• 15:05   Re: Posrgres speed problem Michael Fuhr
• 15:15   Re: pgsql_tmp and postgres settings Jim C. Nasby
• 15:18   Re: Posrgres speed problem Jim C. Nasby
• 15:22   Re: Posrgres speed problem Ruben Rubio Rey
• 15:24   Re: Posrgres speed problem Jim C. Nasby
• 15:26   Re: Posrgres speed problem Jim C. Nasby
• 15:33   Re: Posrgres speed problem Sven Geisler
• 19:41   Interesting slow query PFC
• 22:53   Re: Interesting slow query Tom Lane
• 23:00   64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Anthony Presley
• 23:17   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Josh Berkus
• 23:19   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? David Boreham
• 23:27   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Steve Atkins
• 23:35   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Tom Lane

13 June 2006

• 00:26   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Stephen Frost
• 00:29   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Bill Moran
• 01:14   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Joshua D. Drake
• 01:29   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Steve Atkins
• 01:50   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Luke Lonergan
• 02:16   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? mark@mark.mielke.cc
• 02:26   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Alex Turner
• 02:38   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Christopher Browne
• 02:44   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Tom Lane
• 02:52   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Christopher Browne
• 02:57   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Luke Lonergan
• 03:00   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? David Wheeler
• 03:05   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Leigh Dyer
• 04:06   Re: scaling up postgres Zydoon
• 04:34   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Josh Berkus
• 06:27   Re: function not called if part of aggregate Craig A. James
• 06:31   Placement of 64-bit libraries (offtopic) Steinar H. Gunderson
• 06:37   Re: Posrgres speed problem Ruben Rubio Rey
• 06:44   Re: Posrgres speed problem - solved? Ruben Rubio Rey
• 07:00   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? J. Andrew Rogers
• 08:11   Re: Posrgres speed problem - solved? Guido Neitzer
• 08:17   Re: Posrgres speed problem - solved? Ruben Rubio Rey
• 08:40   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Nis Jorgensen
• 09:04   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Sven Geisler
• 10:34   Re: Posrgres speed problem - solved! Ruben Rubio Rey
• 10:47   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? PFC
• 11:33   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Luke Lonergan
• 11:48   Re: Posrgres speed problem - solved! Guido Neitzer
• 11:56   Re: Interesting slow query PFC
• 12:03   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Sven Geisler
• 12:38   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Christopher Browne
• 12:42   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Luke Lonergan
• 12:43   OT - select + must have from - sql standard syntax? Antoine
• 12:47   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Sven Geisler
• 12:50   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Luke Lonergan
• 12:52   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Sven Geisler
• 13:15   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Andreas Pflug
• 13:46   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? J. Andrew Rogers
• 14:37   Re: function not called if part of aggregate Tom Lane
• 16:12   Re: Placement of 64-bit libraries (offtopic) Stephen Frost
• 17:53   Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 tree Shaun Thomas
• 18:02   Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Steve Poe
• 18:09   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 tree Tom Lane
• 18:17   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 tree Marcin Mank
• 19:00   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Scott Marlowe
• 19:04   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Chris Browne
• 19:11   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? David Boreham
• 19:15   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Bruce Momjian
• 19:26   Re: scaling up postgres Jim C. Nasby
• 19:28   Re: scaling up postgres Scott Marlowe
• 19:38   Re: scaling up postgres Gavin Hamill
• 19:43   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Jim C. Nasby
• 19:44   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Joshua D. Drake
• 20:08   Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? Jim C. Nasby
• 20:11   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Dave Page
• 20:13   Re: scaling up postgres PFC
• 20:55   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Shaun Thomas
• 21:03   Re: OT - select + must have from - sql standard syntax? Jim C. Nasby
• 21:07   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 tree Tom Lane
• 21:17   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Jim C. Nasby
• 21:21   Re: scaling up postgres Jim C. Nasby
• 21:31   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Jim C. Nasby
• 21:36   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Shaun Thomas
• 21:41   Re: scaling up postgres John Vincent
• 21:54   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Jim C. Nasby
• 21:55   Re: scaling up postgres Zydoon
• 22:04   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Tom Lane
• 22:05   Re: scaling up postgres Jim C. Nasby
• 22:13   Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Mischa Sandberg
• 22:21   Re: scaling up postgres John Vincent
• 22:22   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Tom Lane
• 22:34   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Michael Fuhr
• 22:40   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Jim C. Nasby
• 22:42   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Shaun Thomas
• 22:45   Re: scaling up postgres Jim C. Nasby
• 22:48   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Jim C. Nasby
• 22:54   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Jim C. Nasby
• 22:55   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Joshua D. Drake
• 22:56   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Mischa Sandberg
• 23:12   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Mischa Sandberg
• 23:17   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Jim C. Nasby
• 23:53   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Mischa Sandberg

14 June 2006

• 00:11   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Mark Kirkwood
• 01:19   Re: scaling up postgres John Vincent
• 01:51   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Tom Lane
• 02:04   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Tom Lane
• 02:13   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Tom Lane
• 02:24   Re: scaling up postgres Tom Lane
• 02:44   Re: OT - select + must have from - sql standard syntax? Tom Lane
• 03:35   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Jim C. Nasby
• 04:15   Re: OT - select + must have from - sql standard syntax? Greg Stark
• 06:36   Re: OT - select + must have from - sql standard syntax? Antoine
• 07:52   how to partition disks hubert depesz lubaczewski
• 08:26   Re: how to partition disks Sven Geisler
• 10:54   Precomputed constants? Böszörményi Zoltán
• 11:09   Re: Precomputed constants? Volkan YAZICI
• 11:21   Re: how to partition disks hubert depesz lubaczewski
• 11:30   Re: Precomputed constants? Böszörményi Zoltán
• 11:41   Re: how to partition disks Sven Geisler
• 13:57   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Jim C. Nasby
• 13:58   Re: OT - select + must have from - sql standard syntax? Dave Dutcher
• 14:20   Re: OT - select + must have from - sql standard syntax? Tom Lane
• 14:23   Re: how to partition disks Richard Broersma Jr
• 14:32   Re: how to partition disks Sven Geisler
• 14:32   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Shaun Thomas
• 15:03   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Steve Poe
• 15:14   Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 John E. Vincent
• 15:16   Re: how to partition disks Jim C. Nasby
• 15:18   Re: Precomputed constants? Jim C. Nasby
• 15:52   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 Tom Lane
• 16:44   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 Scott Marlowe
• 16:58   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Mischa Sandberg
• 17:04   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Scott Marlowe
• 17:04   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 John Vincent
• 17:29   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 A.M.
• 18:11   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 John Vincent
• 18:43   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Dave Page
• 19:04   Re: OT - select + must have from - sql standard syntax? Antoine
• 19:30   Postgres consuming way too much memory??? jody brownell
• 19:52   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Scott Marlowe
• 20:01   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Dave Page
• 20:03   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? Tom Lane
• 20:11   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 Scott Marlowe
• 20:55   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 John Vincent
• 21:03   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 Scott Marlowe
• 21:13   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 Jim C. Nasby
• 21:16   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 John Vincent
• 21:18   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 John Vincent
• 21:25   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 Jim C. Nasby
• 21:25   Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? Josh Berkus
• 21:48   Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Dan Gorman
• 21:53   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp D'Arcy J.M. Cain
• 21:55   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Mark Lewis
• 22:13   Re: Effects of cascading references in foreign keys Bruce Momjian

15 June 2006

• 00:39   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Jim Nasby
• 02:37   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Tom Lane
• 03:34   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Greg Stark
• 04:31   Re: Precomputed constants? Zoltan Boszormenyi
• 05:14   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Jonah H. Harris
• 05:21   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Dan Gorman
• 05:35   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Jonah H. Harris
• 05:38   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Jonah H. Harris
• 05:51   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Joe Conway
• 05:58   Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? kah_hang_ang@toray.com.my
• 06:03   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Dan Gorman
• 06:07   Re: Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? A. Kretschmer
• 06:35   Re: Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? kah_hang_ang@toray.com.my
• 07:07   Re: Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? A. Kretschmer
• 07:25   Re: Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? kah_hang_ang@toray.com.my
• 08:16   Re: Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? Nis Jorgensen
• 12:01   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? jody brownell
• 12:15   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? jody brownell
• 12:43   How to analyze function performance Mindaugas
• 13:03   Re: How to analyze function performance Tomas Vondra
• 14:24   Re: How to analyze function performance Tom Lane
• 15:03   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? jody brownell
• 15:04   Re: Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? Chris Browne
• 15:34   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? Tom Lane
• 15:44   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? Tom Lane
• 15:50   Re: Confirmation of bad query plan generated by 7.4 Jim C. Nasby
• 15:54   Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp Jim C. Nasby
• 15:59   Re: Precomputed constants? Jim C. Nasby
• 16:12   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? jody brownell
• 16:18   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? Tom Lane
• 16:22   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Vivek Khera
• 16:57   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? Mark Lewis
• 17:11   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Steve Poe
• 17:18   Re: Postgres consuming way too much memory??? Bruce Momjian
• 17:36   Re: Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? Dan Harris
• 17:47   Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? Vivek Khera
• 17:53   Re: Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? Bill Moran
• 18:05   Optimizer internals John Vincent
• 18:19   Re: Precomputed constants? Zoltan Boszormenyi
• 18:33   Re: Optimizer internals Mark Lewis
• 18:46   Re: Optimizer internals John Vincent
• 19:01   Re: Optimizer internals Mark Lewis
• 19:22   Re: Optimizer internals John Vincent
• 19:26   Re: Optimizer internals Scott Marlowe
• 19:43   Re: Optimizer internals John Vincent
• 21:50   SAN performance mystery Tim Allen
• 21:57   Re: SAN performance mystery Scott Marlowe
• 22:02   Re: SAN performance mystery Brian Hurt
• 22:15   Re: SAN performance mystery John Vincent
• 22:23   Re: Optimizer internals Jim C. Nasby
• 22:24   Re: SAN performance mystery Tom Lane
• 23:23   Re: Optimizer internals John Vincent
• 23:25   Re: SAN performance mystery Mark Lewis
• 23:58   Re: SAN performance mystery Alex Turner

16 June 2006

• 00:28   Re: Optimizer internals Mischa Sandberg
• 01:04   Re: Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 Merlin Moncure
• 07:06   Delete operation VERY slow... David Leangen
• 07:17   Re: Delete operation VERY slow... A. Kretschmer
• 07:23   Re: Delete operation VERY slow... Gourish Singbal
• 07:48   Re: SAN performance mystery Stefan Kaltenbrunner
• 08:13   Re: Delete operation VERY slow... David Leangen
• 09:11   Re: SAN performance mystery Tim Allen
• 11:22   Re: Delete operation VERY slow... PFC
• 11:23   Re: Optimizer internals Greg Stark
• 11:29   Re: SAN performance mystery Greg Stark
• 11:44   Re: SAN performance mystery Mikael Carneholm
• 12:23   Re: how to partition disks Michael Stone
• 12:51   Re: Optimizer internals Jonah H. Harris
• 13:21   Re: Optimizer internals Greg Stark
• 13:30   Re: Delete operation VERY slow... Tom Lane
• 13:44   Re: Optimizer internals Jonah H. Harris
• 14:19   Re: SAN performance mystery Merlin Moncure
• 15:22   Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL community Robert Lor
• 15:28   Re: Question about clustering multiple columns Bruno Wolff III
• 17:02   Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL community Josh Berkus
• 17:58   Re: SAN performance mystery Jeff Trout
• 18:52   Re: Question about clustering multiple columns Bruno Wolff III
• 22:34   Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL community Arjen van der Meijden
• 23:24   Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL community Josh Berkus

17 June 2006

• 02:02   Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL Tatsuo Ishii
• 02:34   Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL Tom Lane
• 03:05   Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL Tatsuo Ishii
• 04:19   Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL community Robert Lor
• 19:19   Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL Josh Berkus
• 19:45   Re: Precomputed constants? Jim Nasby
• 19:54   Re: Optimizer internals Jim Nasby
• 19:59   Re: SAN performance mystery Jim Nasby
• 19:59   Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL community Jim Nasby
• 20:00   Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL community Jim Nasby

18 June 2006

• 09:18   Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL Arjen van der Meijden

19 June 2006

• 06:12   Re: SAN performance mystery Tim Allen
• 10:09   Re: SAN performance mystery Tim Allen
• 10:24   Re: SAN performance mystery Michael Stone
• 10:28   Re: SAN performance mystery Tim Allen
• 12:42   Re: SAN performance mystery Stephen Frost
• 12:54   Re: SAN performance mystery John Vincent
• 13:00   Re: SAN performance mystery John Vincent
• 15:04   Re: SAN performance mystery Stephen Frost
• 23:17   Re: SAN performance mystery Mark Kirkwood

20 June 2006

• 00:09   Some performance numbers, with thoughts Brian Hurt
• 01:19   Re: Some performance numbers, with thoughts Tom Lane
• 01:24   Re: Some performance numbers, with thoughts Luke Lonergan
• 09:59   Big array speed issues Merkel Marcel (CR/AEM4)
• 13:02   Curson prbolem biuro@globeinphotos.com
• 14:28   Re: Curson prbolem Tom Lane
• 15:12   Re: lowering priority automatically at connection Markus Schaber
• 17:25   Re: Query hanging/not finishing inconsistently Meetesh Karia

21 June 2006

• 02:56   Re: Big array speed issues Merlin Moncure
• 04:52   ACL cleanup Eric Lauzon
• 07:28   Re: scaling up postgres Markus Schaber
• 07:32   Re: Big array speed issues Merkel Marcel (CR/AEM4)
• 07:33   Re: scaling up postgres Markus Schaber
• 07:49   Re: Some queries starting to hang Markus Schaber
• 13:53   Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relation bloat jody brownell
• 14:08   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relation Csaba Nagy
• 14:17   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relation Tom Lane
• 14:19   Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. nicky
• 14:53   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. Dave Dutcher
• 15:27   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat jody brownell
• 15:37   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. Sven Geisler
• 15:42   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat Csaba Nagy
• 16:21   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat jody brownell
• 16:34   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat jody brownell
• 16:36   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat Csaba Nagy
• 16:39   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat jody brownell
• 16:44   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat Csaba Nagy
• 16:50   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat jody brownell
• 17:03   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. Scott Marlowe
• 17:12   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. Tom Lane
• 18:26   Performance of DOMAINs David Wheeler
• 18:33   Re: Big array speed issues Jim C. Nasby
• 18:48   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. Jim C. Nasby
• 18:58   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relation bloat Jim C. Nasby
• 19:03   Re: Performance of DOMAINs Jim C. Nasby
• 19:38   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat Jim C. Nasby
• 19:40   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat jody brownell
• 19:41   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat jody brownell
• 19:49   Re: Big array speed issues Merlin Moncure
• 20:08   Re: Performance of DOMAINs Tom Lane
• 20:46   Quick question about top... Alex Turner
• 21:18   Re: Quick question about top... Steinar H. Gunderson
• 21:31   Tuning New Server (slow function) Ron St-Pierre
• 22:36   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat Jim C. Nasby
• 22:36   Re: Tuning New Server (slow function) Jim C. Nasby
• 22:56   Re: Tuning New Server (slow function) Ron St-Pierre
• 23:09   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat jody brownell

22 June 2006

• 01:19   Re: Performance of DOMAINs Josh Berkus
• 02:24   Re: Performance of DOMAINs Michael Glaesemann
• 04:58   Regarding ERROR: fmgr_info: function 2720768: cache lookup failed soni de
• 06:05   Why is my (empty) partial index query slow? Richard Frith-Macdonald
• 06:05   Re: Optimizer internals John Vincent
• 06:05   Re: Question about clustering multiple columns Benjamin Arai
• 06:05   Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL Andrew Dunstan
• 06:05   Re: SAN performance mystery John Vincent
• 06:06   Poor performance - fixed by restart Peter Wilson
• 06:06   Tuning New Server (slow function) Ron St-Pierre
• 06:06   Tuning New Server (slow function) Ron St-Pierre
• 09:49   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. nicky
• 11:29   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. Sven Geisler
• 12:11   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. nicky
• 12:17   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. Magnus Hagander
• 12:20   Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. Sven Geisler
• 13:22   Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL David Roussel
• 14:19   Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL Arjen van der Meijden
• 14:47   Re: Regarding ERROR: fmgr_info: function 2720768: cache lookup failed Tom Lane
• 15:04   Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL Craig A. James
• 16:05   Re: Why is my (empty) partial index query slow? Tom Lane
• 16:20   Re: Tuning New Server (slow function) Tom Lane
• 16:24   Re: Poor performance - fixed by restart Tom Lane
• 18:11   Re: Performance of DOMAINs David Wheeler
• 18:18   Re: Performance of DOMAINs David Wheeler
• 18:18   Re: Performance of DOMAINs David Wheeler
• 18:23   why group expressions cause query to run forever Andrus
• 19:30   Re: why group expressions cause query to run forever Tom Lane
• 21:15   Re: Tuning New Server (slow function) Jim Nasby

23 June 2006

• 00:31   Re: Query hanging/not finishing inconsistently Tom Lane
• 00:44   Re: Why is my (empty) partial index query slow? Tom Lane
• 10:29   Occupation bloc in pages of table luchot
• 11:56   Re: SAN performance mystery Markus Schaber
• 12:02   Re: SAN performance mystery Markus Schaber
• 12:32   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat Markus Schaber
• 12:40   Re: Help tuning autovacuum - seeing lots of relationbloat Markus Schaber
• 16:09   Re: Occupation bloc in pages of table Tom Lane
• 18:39   Buffers to Nest Loop Join Daniel Xavier de Sousa
• 21:52   Temporary table Franklin Haut
• 22:04   Re: Temporary table Tom Lane
• 22:08   Re: Temporary table Larry Rosenman

24 June 2006

• 00:22   RES: Temporary table Franklin Haut
• 04:28   Re: Optimizer internals Bruno Wolff III

26 June 2006

• 12:16   Re: Occupation bloc in pages of table luchot
• 12:20   Re: why group expressions cause query to run forever Andrus
• 12:34   Re: Occupation bloc in pages of table luchot
• 12:34   Re: Occupation bloc in pages of table luchot
• 19:41   Re: Some performance numbers, with thoughts Simon Riggs
• 21:22   Re: Some performance numbers, with thoughts Michael Stone
• 22:45   unsubscribe Diego Gaviola

27 June 2006

• 07:13   Re: Some performance numbers, with thoughts Simon Riggs
• 12:23   Large index scan perfomance and indexCorrelation (PG 8.1.4 Win32) Andrew Sagulin
• 14:04   unregister Gourish Singbal
• 17:16   unregister Leandro Guimarães dos Santos
• 18:02   Re: why group expressions cause query to run forever Andrus
• 22:04   Re: Large index scan perfomance and indexCorrelation (PG Simon Riggs

28 June 2006

• 09:34   Large index scan perfomance and indexCorrelation (PG 8.1.4 Win32) Andrew Sagulin
• 14:37   Re: Large index scan perfomance and indexCorrelation (PG 8.1.4 Win32) Tom Lane
• 15:08   Re: Large index scan perfomance and indexCorrelation (PG 8.1.4 Win32) Jim C. Nasby
• 15:41   Re: Some performance numbers, with thoughts Ron Mayer

30 June 2006

• 05:54   explain analyze reports 20x more time than actual Craig A. James
• 05:56   Sort order in sub-select Craig A. James
• 06:05   Re: explain analyze reports 20x more time than actual Tom Lane
• 06:21   Re: Sort order in sub-select Tom Lane
• 06:33   FWD: Update touches unrelated indexes? Josh Berkus
• 06:44   Re: FWD: Update touches unrelated indexes? Tom Lane
• 14:05   Index Being Ignored? Joe Lester
• 14:14   newly created database makes queries run 300% faster Ksenia Marasanova
• 14:29   Re: Index Being Ignored? Markus Schaber
• 14:36   Re: newly created database makes queries run 300% faster Brad Nicholson
• 14:41   Re: Index Being Ignored? Tom Lane
• 15:26   Re: FWD: Update touches unrelated indexes? Jozsef Szalay
• 16:31   Re: Index Being Ignored? Joe Lester
• 17:28   Re: FWD: Update touches unrelated indexes? Alvaro Herrera
• 17:58   Re: [pgadmin-support] 100% CPU Jim C. Nasby
• 18:21   Re: Index Being Ignored? Alvaro Herrera