Mailing lists [pgsql-performance]

1 September 2006

• 13:25   database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... Matteo Sgalaberni
• 15:39   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... Tom Lane
• 18:08   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... Patrick Hatcher
• 18:41   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... Markus Schaber
• 19:35   increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed from OS filesystem cache? Guillaume Cottenceau
• 19:54   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... Matteo Sgalaberni
• 20:04   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... Tom Lane
• 21:35   Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed from OS filesystem cache? Merlin Moncure
• 21:43   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query Scott Marlowe
• 21:44   Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed from OS filesystem cache? Dave Cramer
• 23:35   Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed from OS filesystem cache? Dave Cramer

2 September 2006

• 00:25   Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed Joshua D. Drake
• 08:37   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... [RESOLVED] Matteo Sgalaberni
• 14:16   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... [RESOLVED] Dave Cramer
• 14:21   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... [RESOLVED] Tom Lane

4 September 2006

• 03:53   Re: Postgress memory leak with JBoss3.2.6 and large DB Mark Kirkwood
• 08:06   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... Markus Schaber
• 11:39   Re: [BUGS] Hanging queries on Windows 2003 SP1 Magnus Hagander
• 12:09   Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed from OS filesystem cache? Guillaume Cottenceau
• 12:12   Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed from OS filesystem cache? Guillaume Cottenceau
• 15:14   Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed from OS filesystem cache? Dave Cramer
• 18:06   Re: how to partition disks Francisco Reyes
• 20:44   64bit vs 32bit build on amd64 Roman Krylov
• 22:38   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... [RESOLVED] Gregory Stark
• 22:47   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... [RESOLVED] Alvaro Herrera

5 September 2006

• 00:30   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... [RESOLVED] Gregory Stark
• 03:17   Re: database bloat,non removovable rows, slow query etc... [RESOLVED] Tom Lane
• 04:01   Re: Postgress memory leak with JBoss3.2.6 and large DB Indika Maligaspe
• 13:32   Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed Merlin Moncure
• 18:13   Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed Dave Cramer

6 September 2006

• 12:50   Lists (In) performance Marcus Vinicius

7 September 2006

• 10:31   Template0 age is increasing speedily. Nimesh Satam
• 10:40   Re: [PATCHES] Template0 age is increasing speedily. Chris Mair
• 10:49   Re: [PATCHES] Template0 age is increasing speedily. Nimesh Satam
• 12:50   Re: [PATCHES] Template0 age is increasing speedily. Bill Moran
• 12:55   Re: [PATCHES] Template0 age is increasing speedily. Dave Dutcher
• 13:04   Re: [HACKERS] Template0 age is increasing speedily. Merlin Moncure
• 17:55   Re: 64bit vs 32bit build on amd64 Jeff Davis

8 September 2006

• 05:51   Xeon Woodcrest/Dempsey vs Opteron Socket F/940 with postgresql and some SAS raid-figures Arjen van der Meijden
• 06:17   Re: Xeon Woodcrest/Dempsey vs Opteron Socket F/940 Luke Lonergan
• 08:22   Configuring System for Speed Brian Wipf
• 08:45   Re: Configuring System for Speed Luke Lonergan
• 10:02   Performance in a 7 TB database. Nuno Alexandre Alves
• 11:52   Re: Xeon Woodcrest/Dempsey vs Opteron Socket F/940 with postgresql and some SAS raid-figures Dave Cramer
• 12:46   Re: Xeon Woodcrest/Dempsey vs Opteron Socket F/940 with Arjen van der Meijden
• 12:50   Performance problem with joins fardeen memon
• 13:07   Re: Xeon Woodcrest/Dempsey vs Opteron Socket F/940 with postgresql and some SAS raid-figures Dave Cramer
• 14:43   Re: Configuring System for Speed alvis
• 14:52   Re: Performance problem with joins Tom Lane
• 15:04   unsubscribe me Phadnis
• 15:08   Re: unsubscribe me Guillaume Cottenceau
• 16:08   Re: Xeon Woodcrest/Dempsey vs Opteron Socket F/940 with Arjen van der Meijden
• 16:19   Re: Xeon Woodcrest/Dempsey vs Opteron Socket F/940 with Stefan Kaltenbrunner
• 16:19   Re: Performance in a 7 TB database. Jeff Davis
• 16:46   Re: Xeon Woodcrest/Dempsey vs Opteron Socket F/940 with Arjen van der Meijden

9 September 2006

• 14:48   Re: Configuring System for Speed Ron

11 September 2006

• 11:29   Re: Performance problem with joins fardeen memon
• 13:48   Abysmal hash join Florian Weimer
• 14:22   Re: Performance problem with joins Tom Lane
• 14:29   Re: Abysmal hash join Tom Lane
• 15:15   Re: Abysmal hash join Florian Weimer
• 15:40   Re: Abysmal hash join Tom Lane
• 15:50   Re: Configuring System for Speed Brian Wipf
• 16:29   Re: Abysmal hash join Florian Weimer
• 18:50   Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Piñeiro
• 19:02   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Dave Dutcher
• 19:12   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Jeff Davis
• 22:03   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Scott Marlowe
• 23:37   Re: Configuring System for Speed Luke Lonergan

12 September 2006

• 00:57   Re: Abysmal hash join Gregory Stark
• 01:53   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Merlin Moncure
• 07:18   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Piñeiro
• 10:17   Poor performance on seq scan Laszlo Nagy
• 10:47   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Heikki Linnakangas
• 10:50   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Luke Lonergan
• 12:15   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Laszlo Nagy
• 12:37   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Laszlo Nagy
• 12:37   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Guillaume Cottenceau
• 12:47   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Guillaume Cottenceau
• 13:25   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Heikki Linnakangas
• 13:33   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Alvaro Herrera
• 13:45   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Heikki Linnakangas
• 14:27   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Scott Marlowe
• 14:29   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Scott Marlowe
• 14:52   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Tom Lane
• 15:10   Reg - Autovacuum krishnaraj D
• 15:13   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Tom Lane
• 15:19   Re: Reg - Autovacuum Chris Mair
• 15:38   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody Merlin Moncure
• 16:07   [Fwd: Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody] Piñeiro
• 16:20   Re: [Fwd: Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared Scott Marlowe
• 16:22   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Luke Lonergan
• 16:52   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Tom Lane
• 17:02   tsearch2 question (was: Poor performance on seq scan) Laszlo Nagy
• 17:13   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Laszlo Nagy
• 18:29   Re: [Fwd: Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared Piñeiro
• 18:46   Re: tsearch2 question (was: Poor performance on seq Luke Lonergan
• 19:18   Re: [Fwd: Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared Dave Dutcher
• 19:21   Re: [Fwd: Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared Alvaro Herrera
• 19:44    jallgood@the-allgoods.net
• 20:53   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Tom Lane
• 21:04   Bad plan for join to aggregate of join. Mischa Sandberg
• 21:07   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Craig A. James
• 21:49   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Laszlo Nagy
• 22:17   Performance With Joins on Large Tables Joshua Marsh
• 22:19   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Luke Lonergan
• 23:42   Re: Bad plan for join to aggregate of join. Tom Lane

13 September 2006

• 00:15   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Mark Kirkwood
• 00:40   Re: Bad plan for join to aggregate of join. Mischa Sandberg
• 06:35   Re: Jim C. Nasby
• 06:41   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Jim C. Nasby
• 10:16   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Laszlo Nagy
• 12:22   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Dave Cramer
• 12:24   sql-bench yoav x
• 12:27   Re: sql-bench Dave Cramer
• 12:50   Re: sql-bench yoav x
• 14:03   Re: sql-bench Dave Cramer
• 14:44   Re: sql-bench Mark Lewis
• 14:49   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Joshua Marsh
• 15:32   Re: sql-bench Tom Lane
• 16:08   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Jeff Davis
• 16:19   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Joshua Marsh
• 17:05   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Jeff Davis
• 17:57   Unsubscribe Christoph Nelles
• 18:19   Query Progress (was: Performance With Joins on Large Tables) Bucky Jordan
• 18:39   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Marcin Mank
• 18:57   Re: Query Progress (was: Performance With Joins on Large Tables) Joshua Marsh
• 19:27   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Joshua Marsh
• 19:36   Re: sql-bench Merlin Moncure
• 20:09   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Terje Elde
• 20:28   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Joshua Marsh
• 20:35   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Luke Lonergan
• 20:52   Re: sql-bench Tom Lane
• 20:53   Re: Unsubscribe Geoffrey
• 21:09   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Tom Lane
• 21:10   Re: sql-bench Scott Marlowe
• 21:18   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Joshua Marsh
• 21:21   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Ivan Voras
• 21:23   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Tom Lane
• 21:32   Re: sql-bench Tom Lane
• 21:45   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Joshua Marsh
• 21:46   Unsubscribe Jamal Ghaffour
• 22:08   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Tom Lane
• 23:42   Re: sql-bench Merlin Moncure

14 September 2006

• 06:55   Re: sql-bench yoav x
• 07:05   Re: sql-bench Markus Schaber
• 11:33   Re: sql-bench Dave Cramer
• 13:27   High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 13:46   Re: High CPU Load Guillaume Smet
• 14:00   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 14:13   Re: High CPU Load Tom Lane
• 14:17   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 14:17   Re: High CPU Load Scott Marlowe
• 14:18   Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables Joshua Marsh
• 14:21   Re: High CPU Load Scott Marlowe
• 14:26   Re: High CPU Load Guillaume Smet
• 14:27   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 15:02   Re: High CPU Load Dave Dutcher
• 15:09   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 15:23   Vacuums on large busy databases Francisco Reyes
• 15:57   Re: High CPU Load Scott Marlowe
• 16:57   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Dave Cramer
• 17:17   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Francisco Reyes
• 17:37   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Francisco Reyes
• 18:21   RAID 0 not as fast as expected Craig A. James
• 18:44   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Dave Cramer
• 18:50   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Joshua D. Drake
• 19:08   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Alan Hodgson
• 19:25   Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Bruce Momjian
• 20:30   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Francisco Reyes
• 20:42   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Michael Stone
• 21:07   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 21:14   Re: High CPU Load Tom Lane
• 21:23   Re: High CPU Load Guillaume Smet
• 21:36   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Craig A. James
• 21:36   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Jeff Davis
• 21:37   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 21:48   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 21:53   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Dave Cramer
• 21:58   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Scott Marlowe
• 22:24   Re: High CPU Load Guillaume Smet
• 22:50   Re: High CPU Load Bucky Jordan
• 23:31   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Francisco Reyes
• 23:51   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Francisco Reyes

15 September 2006

• 00:04   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Francisco Reyes
• 00:07   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Dave Cramer
• 00:08   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Michael Stone
• 00:27   Re: sql-bench Grega Bremec
• 00:32   Re: sql-bench Steinar H. Gunderson
• 00:35   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Jeff Davis
• 00:52   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Jeff Davis
• 00:59   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Jeff Davis
• 01:04   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Michael Stone
• 01:34   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Jeff Davis
• 01:44   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Jeff Davis
• 03:38   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Luke Lonergan
• 03:48   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Joshua D. Drake
• 04:01   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Joshua D. Drake
• 08:51   Why the difference in plans ?? Joost Kraaijeveld
• 09:44   Re: High CPU Load Markus Schaber
• 09:48   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Markus Schaber
• 10:10   Re: High CPU Load Guillaume Smet
• 12:54   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Spiegelberg, Greg
• 14:08   Re: Why the difference in plans ?? Tom Lane
• 15:09   Optimize SQL Pallav Kalva
• 15:42   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Luke Lonergan
• 15:53   Re: Optimize SQL Tom Lane
• 16:05   Re: Why the difference in plans ?? Joost Kraaijeveld
• 16:17   Re: Why the difference in plans ?? Tom Lane
• 16:23   Re: Optimize SQL Arjen van der Meijden
• 18:28   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Bucky Jordan
• 20:04   Performance of IN (...) vs. = ANY array[...] Benjamin Minshall
• 20:19   Re: Performance of IN (...) vs. = ANY array[...] Tom Lane

16 September 2006

• 05:23   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Luke Lonergan
• 23:47   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Luke Lonergan

17 September 2006

• 00:08   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Steinar H. Gunderson
• 00:44   Re: RAID 0 not as fast as expected Joshua D. Drake
• 05:22   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Piotr Kołaczkowski
• 05:22   Re: High CPU Load Evgeny Gridasov
• 05:22   Lanzamiento www.PortalTPV.com Portal TPV
• 22:12   Partition elimination problem Milen Kulev
• 23:13   Re: Partition elimination problem Tom Lane

18 September 2006

• 06:08   Re: Partition elimination problem Milen Kulev
• 06:10   Re: Partition elimination problem -> Solved Milen Kulev
• 07:36   Re: Optimize SQL Mikael Carneholm
• 08:22   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Markus Schaber
• 08:50   Re: Poor performance on seq scan Guido Neitzer
• 14:37   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 14:38   Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) Bucky Jordan
• 14:44   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 15:49   Re: High CPU Load Guillaume Smet
• 20:56   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) Merlin Moncure
• 21:02   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) Alan Hodgson
• 22:40   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Jim C. Nasby
• 22:41   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) Bucky Jordan
• 23:15   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) Alex Turner
• 23:58   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) Michael Stone

19 September 2006

• 00:07   LIKE query problem Marc McIntyre
• 00:21   Re: Vacuums on large busy databases Francisco Reyes
• 01:11   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) Luke Lonergan
• 01:15   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Luke Lonergan
• 02:50   Re: LIKE query problem Tom Lane
• 03:17   Re: LIKE query problem Marc McIntyre
• 03:40   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) Alex Turner
• 03:43   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Luke Lonergan
• 03:45   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) mark@mark.mielke.cc
• 04:02   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Luke Lonergan
• 09:53   Re: High CPU Load Markus Schaber
• 12:48   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 13:10   Re: High CPU Load Markus Schaber
• 13:48   Optimizing DELETE Ivan Voras
• 14:04   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) Bucky Jordan
• 14:16   Re: Optimizing DELETE Csaba Nagy
• 14:17   Re: Optimizing DELETE Rod Taylor
• 14:22   Re: Optimizing DELETE Mark Lewis
• 20:39   Re: Optimizing DELETE Ivan Voras
• 20:44   Pipelined functions in Postgres Milen Kulev
• 21:05   Re: Pipelined functions in Postgres Shoaib Mir
• 21:08   Re: Pipelined functions in Postgres Talha Khan
• 21:22   Re: Pipelined functions in Postgres Milen Kulev
• 21:29   Re: Pipelined functions in Postgres Milen Kulev
• 22:04   Re: Pipelined functions in Postgres Shoaib Mir
• 23:54   Re: Pipelined functions in Postgres Jeff Davis

20 September 2006

• 08:09   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Markus Schaber
• 09:09   Update on high concurrency OLTP application and Postgres 8 tuning Cosimo Streppone
• 11:07   Re: Update on high concurrency OLTP application and Postgres 8 tuning Andrew Sullivan
• 12:22   Re: Update on high concurrency OLTP application and Postgres Cosimo Streppone
• 15:28   running benchmark test on a 50GB database Nuno Alves
• 15:44   Re: running benchmark test on a 50GB database Dave Dutcher
• 15:48   Re: running benchmark test on a 50GB database Chris Mair
• 17:06   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Luke Lonergan
• 18:02   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Markus Schaber
• 19:36   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Ron
• 22:05   Re: running benchmark test on a 50GB database Jim C. Nasby

21 September 2006

• 00:24   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Luke Lonergan
• 07:31   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Markus Schaber
• 14:52   PostgreSQL and sql-bench yoav x
• 15:03   Re: PostgreSQL and sql-bench Brad Nicholson
• 15:07   Re: PostgreSQL and sql-bench Mark Lewis
• 15:10   Re: PostgreSQL and sql-bench Guido Neitzer
• 15:13   Re: PostgreSQL and sql-bench Tom Lane
• 16:47   Re: PostgreSQL and sql-bench Jeff Davis
• 19:14   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Bucky Jordan
• 19:42   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Mark Lewis
• 19:54   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Markus Schaber
• 21:16   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Bucky Jordan
• 21:43   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Markus Schaber
• 21:49   Re: PostgreSQL and sql-bench Jim C. Nasby
• 22:26   Re: PostgreSQL and sql-bench Arjen van der Meijden

22 September 2006

• 02:20   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Luke Lonergan
• 03:02   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Guy Thornley
• 03:07   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Bruce Momjian
• 03:41   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as mark@mark.mielke.cc
• 03:47   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Luke Lonergan
• 07:44   Re: High CPU Load Jérôme BENOIS
• 08:29   Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Hannes Dorbath
• 08:59   Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Arjen van der Meijden
• 09:13   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Markus Schaber
• 09:30   Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" nicky
• 14:01   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Jim C. Nasby
• 14:02   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Jim C. Nasby
• 15:35   Confusion and Questions about blocks read Alex Turner
• 16:31   Re: Confusion and Questions about blocks read Tom Lane
• 17:46   Re: Confusion and Questions about blocks read Alex Turner
• 17:53   recommended benchmarks Charles Sprickman
• 19:08   Re: recommended benchmarks Brad Nicholson
• 20:34   Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Vivek Khera
• 21:18   Re: recommended benchmarks Bucky Jordan
• 21:38   Re: Confusion and Questions about blocks read Alex Turner
• 21:50   Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Arjen van der Meijden
• 22:36   Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" mark@mark.mielke.cc
• 23:24   Why is it choosing a different plan? Anthony Presley

23 September 2006

• 00:01   Re: Why is it choosing a different plan? Anthony Presley
• 00:25   Re: Why is it choosing a different plan? Anthony Presley
• 11:52   Re: recommended benchmarks Denis Lussier
• 12:19   Re: Confusion and Questions about blocks read Markus Schaber
• 13:00   Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Guido Neitzer
• 13:17   Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Dave Cramer
• 13:50   Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Guido Neitzer
• 13:57   Re: Update on high concurrency OLTP application and Postgres Cosimo Streppone
• 14:19   Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Dave Cramer

24 September 2006

• 13:30   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Ron Mayer
• 17:12   IN not handled very well? Ben
• 17:57   Re: IN not handled very well? Tom Lane
• 18:12   Re: IN not handled very well? Ben

25 September 2006

• 08:30   Multi-processor question Kjell Tore Fossbakk
• 08:47   Re: Multi-processor question Markus Schaber
• 14:25   Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as Luke Lonergan
• 14:58   Re: PostgreSQL and sql-bench yoav x
• 20:34   Decreasing BLKSZ Marc Morin
• 21:11   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Markus Schaber
• 21:54   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Marc Morin
• 22:27   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Tom Lane
• 22:28   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Mark Lewis

26 September 2006

• 00:29   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Marc Morin
• 19:54   Merge Join vs Nested Loop Tobias Brox
• 21:25   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Bucky Jordan
• 21:36   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Marc Morin
• 22:10   Re: Merge Join vs Nested Loop Tom Lane
• 22:14   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Bucky Jordan
• 22:39   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Markus Schaber
• 23:28   Re: slow i/o Junaili Lie

27 September 2006

• 03:15   Re: Update on high concurrency OLTP application and Postgres Jim Nasby
• 03:22   Re: IN not handled very well? Jim Nasby
• 03:46   Re: Decreasing BLKSZ Jim Nasby
• 03:46   Re: Confusion and Questions about blocks read Jim Nasby
• 03:46   Re: PostgreSQL and sql-bench Jim Nasby
• 06:39   Forcing the use of particular execution plans Tim Truman
• 09:48   Re: Merge Join vs Nested Loop Tobias Brox
• 12:34   Re: Forcing the use of particular execution plans Jochem van Dieten
• 14:59   Re: Merge Join vs Nested Loop Scott Marlowe
• 15:05   Re: Merge Join vs Nested Loop Tobias Brox
• 15:20   Re: Merge Join vs Nested Loop Scott Marlowe
• 15:27   Re: Merge Join vs Nested Loop Tobias Brox
• 15:31   Re: Merge Join vs Nested Loop Scott Marlowe
• 15:36   Re: Merge Join vs Nested Loop Tobias Brox
• 15:52   Re: Forcing the use of particular execution plans Dave Dutcher
• 16:08   autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Edoardo Ceccarelli
• 16:13   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Alan Hodgson
• 16:13   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Tobias Brox
• 16:13   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Csaba Nagy
• 16:15   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Bill Moran
• 16:40   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Edoardo Ceccarelli
• 16:49   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Edoardo Ceccarelli
• 16:53   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Tobias Brox
• 17:00   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Rod Taylor
• 18:33   Re: [ADMIN] autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Matthew T. O'Connor
• 18:37   Problems with inconsistant query performance. Matthew Schumacher
• 19:01   Re: Merge Join vs Nested Loop Tobias Brox
• 20:14   Re: Forcing the use of particular execution plans Jim C. Nasby
• 20:28   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Bill Moran
• 20:32   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Jim C. Nasby
• 21:33   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Matthew Schumacher
• 21:42   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Jim C. Nasby
• 22:17   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Matthew Schumacher
• 22:29   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Jim C. Nasby

28 September 2006

• 06:56   slow queue-like empty table Tobias Brox
• 07:36   Re: slow queue-like empty table Tobias Brox
• 08:44   Re: autovacuum on a -mostly- r/o table Edoardo Ceccarelli
• 08:45   Re: slow queue-like empty table Csaba Nagy
• 12:35   Re: slow i/o Jignesh K. Shah
• 12:41   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Marcin Mank
• 15:18   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Matthew Schumacher
• 15:28   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Bill Moran
• 16:16   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Jim C. Nasby
• 16:44   Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 17:11   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Joshua D. Drake
• 17:18   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Merlin Moncure
• 17:40   Re: Problems with inconsistant query performance. Bill Moran
• 17:48   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 17:53   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 18:26   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Steve Atkins
• 18:27   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Dave Dutcher
• 18:34   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Jim C. Nasby
• 18:44   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Jim C. Nasby
• 18:46   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Jim C. Nasby
• 18:54   ... Jim C. Nasby
• 19:07   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Matthew Nuzum
• 19:07   RES: Performace Optimization for Dummies Leandro Guimarães dos Santos
• 19:11   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 19:47   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 20:07   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Merlin Moncure
• 20:14   archive wal's failure and load increase. Cedric Boudin
• 20:15   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 20:17   Re: slow queue-like empty table Andrew Sullivan
• 20:56   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Merlin Moncure
• 21:04   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 21:05   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Steve Atkins
• 21:28   Re: archive wal's failure and load increase. Tom Lane
• 22:19   any hope for my big query? Ben
• 23:52   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Jim C. Nasby

29 September 2006

• 00:09   Re: any hope for my big query? Jim C. Nasby
• 03:08   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Matthew Nuzum
• 04:31   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 04:37   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 04:47   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 04:49   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 04:49   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Tom Lane
• 05:02   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Carlo Stonebanks
• 09:12   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Heikki Linnakangas
• 09:19   Re: any hope for my big query? Edoardo Ceccarelli
• 10:58   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Simon Riggs
• 10:58   Re: archive wal's failure and load increase. Simon Riggs
• 11:01   Re: any hope for my big query? Simon Riggs
• 12:20   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Markus Schaber
• 12:25   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Markus Schaber
• 12:58   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Bill Moran
• 14:29   Re: archive wal's failure and load increase. Tom Lane
• 14:39   Re: Performace Optimization for Dummies Merlin Moncure
• 14:54   Re: archive wal's failure and load increase. Simon Riggs
• 15:36   Re: any hope for my big query? Jim C. Nasby
• 15:56   Re: archive wal's failure and load increase. Tom Lane
• 17:12   how to optimize postgres 8.1 gurkan@resolution.com
• 18:07   Re: how to optimize postgres 8.1 Tom Lane
• 19:24   Postgres locking up? Brian Hurt
• 19:30   Re: Postgres locking up? Andrew Sullivan
• 20:58   Re: [NOVICE] Postgres locking up? Tom Lane
• 21:36   cont. how to optimize postgres 8.1 gurkan@resolution.com
• 21:58   Re: cont. how to optimize postgres 8.1 Tom Lane

30 September 2006

• 01:24   Re: Postgres locking up? Robert Becker Cope
• 09:26   Table not getting vaccumed. Nimesh Satam
• 09:51   Re: how to optimize postgres 8.1 Markus Schaber
• 16:46   Re: Table not getting vaccumed. Tom Lane