Mailing lists [pgsql-performance]

1 October 2009

• 07:20   long running insert statement Gerd König
• 08:12   Confusion on shared buffer S Arvind
• 09:47   Best suiting OS S Arvind
• 09:47   Re: CPU cost of operators Matthew Wakeling
• 10:00   Re: Best suiting OS Matthew Wakeling
• 10:04   Re: Best suiting OS Jean-David Beyer
• 10:10   Re: Speed while runnning large transactions. Greg Smith
• 10:11   Re: Best suiting OS S Arvind
• 10:14   Re: Best suiting OS Jean-David Beyer
• 10:15   Re: long running insert statement Matthew Wakeling
• 10:33   Re: Best suiting OS S Arvind
• 10:37   Re: Best suiting OS Claus Guttesen
• 13:25   Re: Database performance post-VACUUM FULL Kevin Grittner
• 14:53   Re: long running insert statement Tom Lane
• 15:05   Re: Best suiting OS Haszlakiewicz, Eric
• 15:06   Re: Speed while runnning large transactions. Tom Lane
• 15:12   Re: Best suiting OS Tom Lane
• 17:16   AMD, Intel and RAID controllers Benjamin Minshall
• 17:46   Re: Best suiting OS S Arvind
• 18:03   Re: Best suiting OS Greg Smith
• 18:16   Re: Best suiting OS Greg Smith
• 19:01   Re: AMD, Intel and RAID controllers Greg Smith
• 19:33   Re: Best suiting OS david@lang.hm
• 19:46   Re: Best suiting OS Scott Marlowe

2 October 2009

• 05:44   Re: long running insert statement Gerd König
• 06:48   Re: AMD, Intel and RAID controllers alpesh gajbe
• 08:22   Re: Best suiting OS Scara Maccai
• 08:48   updating a row in a table with only one row Michal Vitecek
• 09:14   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row A. Kretschmer
• 09:28   Re: Best suiting OS Scara Maccai
• 09:32   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Hélder M. Vieira
• 11:39   Re: Best suiting OS Matthew Wakeling
• 12:31   Re: Best suiting OS Devrim GÜNDÜZ
• 12:50   Re: AMD, Intel and RAID controllers Scott Marlowe
• 13:54   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Merlin Moncure
• 14:06   Re: Best suiting OS Tom Lane
• 14:23   Re: Best suiting OS Joe Uhl
• 14:23   Re: Best suiting OS Matthew Wakeling
• 15:41   Re: Best suiting OS Mark Mielke
• 15:44   Re: Best suiting OS - now off topic Aidan Van Dyk
• 17:15   Re: Best suiting OS Jon Nelson
• 17:18   Re: Best suiting OS Greg Smith
• 17:20   Re: Best suiting OS Merlin Moncure
• 17:35   Re: Best suiting OS Greg Smith
• 17:39   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Robert Haas
• 17:43   Re: Best suiting OS Greg Smith
• 18:18   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Merlin Moncure
• 18:39   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Heikki Linnakangas
• 19:00   Re: Best suiting OS Kevin Grittner
• 19:15   Re: Best suiting OS Mark Mielke
• 19:19   Re: Confusion on shared buffer Robert Haas
• 20:30   Re: Speed while runnning large transactions. Kevin Grittner
• 21:38   Re: Best suiting OS Tom Lane
• 21:58   Re: Best suiting OS Dimitri Fontaine
• 22:01   Re: Speed while runnning large transactions. Tom Lane

3 October 2009

• 01:48   dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Justin Pryzby
• 02:35   Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Tom Lane
• 06:12   Re: Confusion on shared buffer S Arvind

4 October 2009

• 01:02   Re: Confusion on shared buffer Robert Haas
• 02:02   Postgres performance std pik
• 02:04   Re: Use of sequence rather than index scan for one text column on one instance of a database Bill Kirtley
• 02:04   Performance problems with DISTINCT ON Sgarbossa Domenico
• 02:05   Re: PG 8.3 and large shared buffer settings Hannu Krosing
• 02:05   Performance RAID 0 mange
• 02:07   Re: Best suiting OS Denis Lussier
• 02:08   Re: AMD, Intel and RAID controllers Alpesh Gajbe
• 02:10   Re: Best suiting OS Jon Nelson
• 02:11   dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Justin Pryzby
• 02:37   Re: Performance problems with DISTINCT ON imad
• 02:42   Re: Best suiting OS Karl Denninger
• 02:53   Re: Performance problems with DISTINCT ON Tom Lane
• 05:31   Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Scott Marlowe
• 11:08   Re: Postgres performance Gerd Koenig
• 13:29   Re: Confusion on shared buffer Gurjeet Singh
• 14:04   Re: Best suiting OS Mark Mielke
• 17:57   Re: Best suiting OS Devrim GÜNDÜZ
• 19:31   Re: Confusion on shared buffer Robert Haas
• 19:51   Re: Best suiting OS Mark Mielke
• 20:57   Re: Best suiting OS Gerhard Wiesinger
• 22:23   Re: Best suiting OS david@lang.hm
• 22:53   Speed / Server anthony@resolution.com

5 October 2009

• 00:20   Re: Speed / Server Scott Marlowe
• 00:43   Re: Best suiting OS Scott Marlowe
• 01:59   Re: Bad performance of SELECT ... where id IN (...) Omar Kilani
• 02:21   Maybe OT, not sure Re: Best suiting OS Mark Mielke
• 07:14   Re: Best suiting OS Craig James
• 09:17   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Michal Vitecek
• 09:53   Re: Best suiting OS Devrim GÜNDÜZ
• 10:07   Re: Best suiting OS Jean-Michel Pouré
• 10:20   Re: Best suiting OS Devrim GÜNDÜZ
• 10:47   Re: Best suiting OS Devrim GÜNDÜZ
• 11:50   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Merlin Moncure
• 12:01   Re: Bad performance of SELECT ... where id IN (...) Robert Haas
• 12:24   Re: Bad performance of SELECT ... where id IN (...) Omar Kilani
• 12:30   Re: Best suiting OS Adam Tauno Williams
• 12:30   Re: Bad performance of SELECT ... where id IN (...) Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 12:37   Re: Maybe OT, not sure Re: Best suiting OS Adam Tauno Williams
• 13:25   Re: Best suiting OS Robert Haas
• 13:31   Re: Speed / Server Nikolas Everett
• 13:37   Re: Best suiting OS Jean-David Beyer
• 13:40   Re: Best suiting OS Adam Tauno Williams
• 13:46   Re: [OT] Best suiting OS Csaba Nagy
• 13:52   Query plan for NOT IN Matthew Wakeling
• 13:56   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 14:00   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Matthew Wakeling
• 14:06   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 14:30   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Tom Lane
• 14:55   Re: Best suiting OS Stefan Kaltenbrunner
• 14:59   Re: Best suiting OS Stefan Kaltenbrunner
• 15:55   Re: Performance RAID 0 Fernando Hevia
• 16:31   Re: Best suiting OS Scott Carey
• 17:27   Re: Best suiting OS Karl Denninger
• 17:29   Re: Best suiting OS Claus Guttesen
• 17:38   Re: Best suiting OS Scott Carey
• 17:43   Re: Best suiting OS Karl Denninger
• 18:06   Re: Best suiting OS Karl Denninger
• 18:14   Re: Best suiting OS Axel Rau
• 18:16   Re: Best suiting OS Karl Denninger
• 18:20   Re: Best suiting OS Greg Smith
• 18:55   Re: Best suiting OS Scott Carey
• 18:59   Re: Speed while runnning large transactions. Greg Smith
• 19:11   Distributed/Parallel Computing Viji V Nair
• 19:35   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Guy Rouillier
• 19:40   Re: Best suiting OS Karl Denninger
• 20:26   Re: Best suiting OS Kevin Grittner
• 20:27   Re: Best suiting OS Axel Rau
• 20:52   Re: Best suiting OS Claus Guttesen
• 21:32   Re: Speed / Server Scott Marlowe
• 21:44   Re: Best suiting OS Karl Denninger
• 22:06   Re: Maybe OT, not sure Re: Best suiting OS Scott Marlowe

6 October 2009

• 02:41   Re: Distributed/Parallel Computing Jeff Janes
• 06:51   Re: Distributed/Parallel Computing Viji V Nair
• 07:28   What is the role of #fsync and #synchronous_commit in configuration file . keshav upadhyaya
• 10:27   Re: Best suiting OS Axel Rau
• 12:49   Re: What is the role of #fsync and #synchronous_commit in configuration file . Dave Dutcher
• 13:16   Dumping + restoring a subset of a table? Shaul Dar
• 13:21   Re: Speed / Server Nikolas Everett
• 13:33   Re: Dumping + restoring a subset of a table? Joshua Tolley
• 13:39   Re: Best suiting OS Karl Denninger
• 14:26   Re: Speed / Server Scott Marlowe
• 14:59   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Michal Vitecek
• 15:25   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Merlin Moncure
• 16:06   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Craig James
• 18:16   Re: Best suiting OS david@lang.hm
• 19:29   Re: Speed / Server Scott Marlowe
• 19:59   Re: Speed / Server Karl Denninger
• 20:20   Re: Best suiting OS Scott Mead
• 20:35   Re: Speed / Server Scott Marlowe
• 21:16   Re: Speed / Server Merlin Moncure
• 22:40   Re: Speed / Server Anthony Presley

7 October 2009

• 00:48   Re: Speed / Server Greg Smith
• 08:47   Re: Speed / Server 
• 13:27   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 14:40   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Kevin Grittner
• 17:33   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Guy Rouillier
• 18:17   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Kevin Grittner
• 20:28   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Craig James
• 22:48   Re: Query plan for NOT IN Guy Rouillier

8 October 2009

• 05:15   Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Greg Smith
• 06:39   Regarding mulitple rows insert in one shot using ADO .net connected to postgres keshav upadhyaya
• 09:19   Query logging time, not values Ludwik Dylag
• 14:26   Re: Best suiting OS Matthew Wakeling
• 14:28   position in DDL of columns used in indexes Michael Gould
• 14:37   Re: position in DDL of columns used in indexes Matthew Wakeling
• 15:09   Re: position in DDL of columns used in indexes Tom Lane
• 15:33   Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Joe Uhl
• 17:27   concurrent reindex issues Tory M Blue
• 17:44   Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Justin T Pryzby
• 17:49   Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Joshua D. Drake
• 17:55   Re: concurrent reindex issues Tom Lane
• 20:05   Re: concurrent reindex issues Scott Marlowe
• 20:16   Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Justin T Pryzby
• 20:30   Explain Analyze returns faster than psql or JDBC calls. G B
• 20:37   Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Kevin Grittner
• 21:15   Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Justin T Pryzby
• 21:19   Re: Explain Analyze returns faster than psql or JDBC calls. Tom Lane

9 October 2009

• 00:49   Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel Joshua D. Drake
• 07:11   Re: High CPU load on Postgres Server during Peak times!!!! Shiva Raman
• 11:57   Re: Explain Analyze returns faster than psql or JDBC calls. Dave Cramer
• 12:32   Re: Bad performance of SELECT ... where id IN (...) Xia Qingran
• 13:09   Re: Bad performance of SELECT ... where id IN (...) Kenneth Marshall
• 13:27   Re: High CPU load on Postgres Server during Peak times!!!! Merlin Moncure
• 16:45   disk I/O problems and Solutions Alan McKay
• 16:56   UUID as primary key tsuraan
• 17:58   Re: concurrent reindex issues Tory M Blue
• 17:59   Databases vs Schemas Scott Otis
• 18:12   Re: Databases vs Schemas Ben Chobot
• 18:30   Re: UUID as primary key Mark Mielke
• 19:04   Re: disk I/O problems and Solutions Flavio Henrique Araque Gurgel
• 19:23   Re: disk I/O problems and Solutions Scott Marlowe
• 21:02   Re: Databases vs Schemas Merlin Moncure
• 23:09   Re: disk I/O problems and Solutions David Rees

10 October 2009

• 02:46   Re: disk I/O problems and Solutions Scott Carey
• 02:51   Re: Databases vs Schemas Scott Carey
• 03:11   Re: Databases vs Schemas Tom Lane
• 05:14   Re: UUID as primary key tsuraan
• 13:26   Re: Databases vs Schemas Merlin Moncure
• 15:17   Re: Databases vs Schemas Chris Kratz
• 15:40   Re: UUID as primary key Mark Mielke
• 21:10   table partitioning & max_locks_per_transaction Brian Karlak
• 21:34   Re: Databases vs Schemas Scott Marlowe

11 October 2009

• 02:57   Re: table partitioning & max_locks_per_transaction Tom Lane
• 15:33   vacuumdb command soorjith p
• 15:59   Re: vacuumdb command Heikki Linnakangas
• 16:44   Re: table partitioning & max_locks_per_transaction Brian Karlak

12 October 2009

• 08:47   Using unnest function on multi-dimensional array. Nimesh Satam
• 08:57   Re: Using unnest function on multi-dimensional array. Pavel Stehule
• 09:23   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Michal Vitecek
• 11:21   Query performance S Arvind
• 12:30   Re: Query performance Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 12:40   Re: Query performance S Arvind
• 13:02   Re: Query performance Matthew Wakeling
• 13:24   Re: Query performance S Arvind
• 13:30   Re: Query performance Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 13:37   Re: Query performance Matthew Wakeling
• 13:40   Re: Query performance Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 14:18   Re: Best suiting OS Cédric Villemain
• 14:25   Re: updating a row in a table with only one row Merlin Moncure
• 14:46   Re: Query performance S Arvind
• 14:53   Re: Query performance S Arvind
• 15:11   Re: Query performance Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 15:31   Re: Best suiting OS Dimitri Fontaine
• 19:06   Are folks running 8.4 in production environments? and 8.4 and slon 1.2? Tory M Blue

13 October 2009

• 07:03   Re: Are folks running 8.4 in production environments? and 8.4 and slon 1.2? Scott Marlowe
• 09:04   index on two tables or Howto speedup max/aggregate-function Michael Schwipps
• 09:19   Re: index on two tables or Howto speedup max/aggregate-function Jacques Caron
• 09:21   Re: index on two tables or Howto speedup max/aggregate-function Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 12:54   Re: Are folks running 8.4 in production environments? and 8.4 and slon 1.2? Kenneth Marshall
• 15:17   Getting a random row Shaul Dar
• 15:19   Re: Getting a random row Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 15:30   Re: Getting a random row Thomas Kellerer
• 15:31   Re: Getting a random row Shaul Dar
• 15:34   Re: Getting a random row Michael Glaesemann
• 15:39   Re: Getting a random row Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 15:42   Re: Getting a random row Shaul Dar
• 16:56   Re: Getting a random row Robert Haas

14 October 2009

• 00:21   Re: Getting a random row bricklen
• 01:18   Re: Getting a random row Scott Marlowe
• 06:59   Re: Getting a random row Thom Brown
• 07:20   Re: Getting a random row Pavel Stehule
• 07:31   Re: Getting a random row Scott Marlowe
• 15:03   Re: Getting a random row Віталій Тимчишин

15 October 2009

• 02:31   sequential scan on child partition tables Anj Adu
• 05:16   Re: sequential scan on child partition tables Tom Lane
• 09:35   [OT] Recommended whitebox server vendors in the UK? Glyn Astill
• 14:03   Regarding facing lot of time Consumed by Socket.Poll() keshav upadhyaya
• 20:51   Re: sequential scan on child partition tables Anj Adu

16 October 2009

• 03:49   There is a statistic table? waldomiro
• 04:28   Re: There is a statistic table? Scott Marlowe
• 06:28   Re: There is a statistic table? Albe Laurenz
• 19:45   Re: UUID as primary key decibel
• 22:02   Re: UUID as primary key Alvaro Herrera
• 23:43   Indexes on low cardinality columns Vikul Khosla

17 October 2009

• 01:27   Re: Indexes on low cardinality columns Greg Stark
• 03:50   Re: UUID as primary key decibel
• 17:03   Re: Indexes on low cardinality columns Vikul Khosla
• 17:34   Re: Indexes on low cardinality columns Robert Haas
• 21:24   Re: Indexes on low cardinality columns Jeff Janes
• 23:40   Calculation of unused columns Volker Grabsch

18 October 2009

• 00:09   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 01:41   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 02:12   Re: Calculation of unused columns Robert Haas
• 03:38   table full scan or index full scan? 旭斌 裴
• 03:38   Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Michal Szymanski
• 03:38   Domain vs table Michal Szymanski
• 03:39   Re: Domain vs table Michal Szymanski
• 03:39   Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Michal Szymanski
• 03:39   Performance with sorting and LIMIT on partitioned table Michal Szymanski
• 03:39   Issues with \copy from file Sigurgeir Gunnarsson
• 03:39   sequential scan on child partition tables Anj Adu
• 03:39   Re: Are folks running 8.4 in production environments? and 8.4 and slon 1.2? Torsten Zühlsdorff
• 03:39   Re: Indexes on low cardinality columns Vikul Khosla
• 03:39   Improving join performance over multiple moderately wide tables miller_2555
• 03:46   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 04:02   Re: Are folks running 8.4 in production environments? and 8.4 and slon 1.2? Karl Denninger
• 04:08   Re: Are folks running 8.4 in production environments? and 8.4 and slon 1.2? Tory M Blue
• 04:14   Re: Are folks running 8.4 in production environments? and 8.4 and slon 1.2? Karl Denninger
• 05:01   Re: table full scan or index full scan? Euler Taveira de Oliveira
• 05:05   Re: Are folks running 8.4 in production environments? and 8.4 and slon 1.2? Scott Marlowe
• 05:07   Re: table full scan or index full scan? Melton Low
• 05:09   Re: sequential scan on child partition tables Scott Marlowe
• 05:34   Re: Issues with \copy from file Euler Taveira de Oliveira
• 06:10   Re: Issues with \copy from file Scott Marlowe
• 12:30   Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Joe Uhl
• 15:17   Re: Calculation of unused columns Daniel Migowski
• 15:24   Re: sequential scan on child partition tables Anj Adu
• 16:00   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 16:50   Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Jesper Krogh
• 17:36   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tim Landscheidt
• 17:59   Re: Calculation of unused columns Jeff Janes
• 18:20   Re: Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Tom Lane
• 18:56   Re: Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Jesper Krogh
• 19:48   Re: Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Tom Lane
• 20:00   Re: Calculation of unused columns Robert Haas
• 20:54   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 22:54   Re: Calculation of unused columns Robert Haas
• 23:41   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane

19 October 2009

• 00:49   Re: Improving join performance over multiple moderately wide tables Robert Haas
• 00:52   Re: Performance with sorting and LIMIT on partitioned table Robert Haas
• 08:24   Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 09:36   Re: Issues with \copy from file Matthew Wakeling
• 10:58   Re: Performance with sorting and LIMIT on partitioned table Joe Uhl
• 13:43   Known Bottlenecks Vikul Khosla
• 13:47   Re: Known Bottlenecks Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 13:59   Re: Indexes on low cardinality columns Ron Mayer
• 16:01   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 16:08   Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Robert Haas
• 16:13   Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 17:36   Re: Calculation of unused columns Simon Riggs
• 17:43   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 17:46   Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Craig James
• 17:48   Re: Calculation of unused columns Kevin Grittner
• 17:49   Re: Calculation of unused columns Simon Riggs
• 17:56   Re: Calculation of unused columns Gerhard Wiesinger
• 17:58   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 18:05   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 18:09   Re: Calculation of unused columns Simon Riggs
• 18:24   Re: Calculation of unused columns Tom Lane
• 19:11   Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Robert Haas
• 19:32   maintain_cluster_order_v5.patch phb07@apra.asso.fr
• 22:06   Re: maintain_cluster_order_v5.patch Jeff Davis

20 October 2009

• 02:50   Re: Performance with sorting and LIMIT on partitioned table Merlin Moncure
• 10:31   Re: Performance with sorting and LIMIT on partitioned table Joe Uhl
• 11:55   Re: Domain vs table Merlin Moncure
• 12:37   Finding rows in table T1 that DO NOT MATCH any row in table T2 Shaul Dar
• 12:46   Re: Finding rows in table T1 that DO NOT MATCH any row in table T2 Shaul Dar
• 12:54   Re: Finding rows in table T1 that DO NOT MATCH any row in table T2 A. Kretschmer
• 13:59   Re: Finding rows in table T1 that DO NOT MATCH any row in table T2 Tom Lane
• 16:14   Re: Finding rows in table T1 that DO NOT MATCH any row in table T2 Melton Low

21 October 2009

• 11:52   Re: Finding rows in table T1 that DO NOT MATCH any row in table T2 Shaul Dar
• 15:03   Random penalties on GIN index updates? jesper@krogh.cc
• 15:14   Re: Random penalties on GIN index updates? Tom Lane
• 17:18   Re: There is a statistic table? Scott Carey
• 17:55   Re: maintain_cluster_order_v5.patch phb07@apra.asso.fr
• 17:58   Re: Random penalties on GIN index updates? Jesper Krogh
• 18:11   Re: Finding rows in table T1 that DO NOT MATCH any row in table T2 Scott Carey
• 18:28   Are unreferenced TOASTed values retrieved? William Blunn
• 18:35   Re: Random penalties on GIN index updates? Tom Lane
• 19:12   Re: Are unreferenced TOASTed values retrieved? Tom Lane
• 22:06   Re: There is a statistic table? Scott Marlowe
• 22:51   optimizing query with multiple aggregates Doug Cole

22 October 2009

• 00:39   Re: optimizing query with multiple aggregates Merlin Moncure
• 02:21   Re: optimizing query with multiple aggregates Doug Cole
• 02:47   Re: optimizing query with multiple aggregates David Wilson
• 02:48   Re: optimizing query with multiple aggregates Nikolas Everett
• 03:16   Re: Random penalties on GIN index updates? Robert Haas
• 04:58   Re: Random penalties on GIN index updates? Jesper Krogh
• 06:56   Re: maintain_cluster_order_v5.patch Heikki Linnakangas
• 11:05   Re: There is a statistic table? Cédric Villemain
• 13:22   Re: optimizing query with multiple aggregates Kenneth Marshall
• 13:27   Re: optimizing query with multiple aggregates Robert Haas
• 16:28   Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jesper Krogh
• 18:51   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Kevin Grittner
• 19:16   Table Clustering & Time Range Queries Kevin Buckham
• 19:25   Re: Table Clustering & Time Range Queries Kevin Grittner
• 21:34   Re: Table Clustering & Time Range Queries Scott Carey
• 21:49   Re: optimizing query with multiple aggregates Scott Carey
• 22:08   Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY Scott Carey
• 22:57   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jeff Davis

23 October 2009

• 05:19   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jesper Krogh
• 05:43   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jeff Davis
• 07:23   Re: Table Clustering & Time Range Queries Scara Maccai
• 07:46   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. jesper@krogh.cc
• 08:26   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Richard Huxton
• 09:04   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. jesper@krogh.cc
• 14:31   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Richard Huxton
• 15:44   query planning different in plpgsql? Michal J. Kubski
• 15:50   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Scott Mead
• 15:55   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jeff Davis
• 15:56   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 16:05   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jeff Davis
• 16:20   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Tom Lane
• 16:28   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Richard Huxton
• 18:13   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jesper Krogh
• 18:39   Calculating selectivity for the query-planner on ts_vector colums. Jesper Krogh
• 19:11   Re: Calculating selectivity for the query-planner on ts_vector colums. Tom Lane
• 19:18   Re: Table Clustering & Time Range Queries Kevin Buckham
• 19:22   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jeff Davis
• 19:30   Re: Calculating selectivity for the query-planner on ts_vector colums. Jesper Krogh
• 20:33   Re: Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Jesper Krogh
• 22:06   Re: Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Tom Lane
• 22:08   Re: Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Scott Marlowe
• 22:55   Re: Table Clustering & Time Range Queries Stephen Frost

24 October 2009

• 04:06   Re: Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Jesper Krogh

25 October 2009

• 00:22   Re: Table Clustering & Time Range Queries Greg Smith

26 October 2009

• 02:05   Re: Domain vs table decibel
• 09:40   Re: optimizing query with multiple aggregates Marc Mamin
• 10:05   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Michal J. Kubski
• 13:45   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Merlin Moncure
• 18:02   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Michal J. Kubski
• 19:20   Re: Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Jesper Krogh
• 19:25   Re: Full text search - query plan? PG 8.4.1 Tom Lane
• 19:34   Re: query planning different in plpgsql?  Tom Lane
• 20:11   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Waldomiro
• 20:13   bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Jesper Krogh

27 October 2009

• 04:57   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Craig Ringer
• 05:09   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Jesper Krogh
• 05:34   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Craig Ringer
• 05:45   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Jesper Krogh
• 06:14   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Craig Ringer
• 06:42   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Jesper Krogh
• 14:48   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Robert Haas
• 15:08   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). jesper@krogh.cc

28 October 2009

• 01:25   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Robert Haas
• 12:11   Postgresql optimisation Denis BUCHER
• 12:26   Re: Postgresql optimisation Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 13:49   Re: Postgresql optimisation Denis BUCHER
• 14:17   Re: Postgresql optimisation Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 14:39   Re: Postgresql optimisation Kevin Grittner
• 16:08   Re: Postgresql optimisation Denis BUCHER
• 16:20   Re: Postgresql optimisation Greg Smith
• 16:30   Re: Postgresql optimisation Dave Dutcher
• 16:37   Re: Postgresql optimisation Matthew Wakeling
• 17:23   Re: Postgresql optimisation Dave Dutcher
• 18:13   sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan Anj Adu

29 October 2009

• 09:54   Re: sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 10:33   Re: sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan Angayarkanni
• 14:10   Re: sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan Anj Adu
• 14:28   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Michal J. Kubski
• 14:32   Re: Postgresql optimisation Denis BUCHER
• 14:32   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Michal J. Kubski
• 15:12   database size growing continously Peter Meszaros
• 15:25   Re: bitmap heap scan way cheaper than seq scan on the same amount of tuples (fts-search). Tom Lane
• 15:29   Re: sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan Bob Lunney
• 15:34   Re: database size growing continously Ludwik Dylag
• 15:35   Re: sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan Robert Haas
• 15:40   Re: sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan Anj Adu
• 15:42   Re: database size growing continously Josh Rovero
• 16:00   Re: database size growing continously Matthew Wakeling
• 16:01   Re: database size growing continously Ludwik Dylag
• 16:14   Re: database size growing continously Chris Ernst
• 16:15   Re: database size growing continously Joshua D. Drake
• 16:21   Re: database size growing continously Steve Crawford
• 16:40   Re: database size growing continously Steve Crawford
• 16:44   Re: query planning different in plpgsql? Scott Carey
• 17:00   Re: database size growing continously Scott Marlowe
• 20:53   Modeling a table with arbitrary columns Andreas Hartmann
• 21:25   Re: Modeling a table with arbitrary columns Thomas Kellerer
• 22:14   Re: database size growing continously Joshua D. Drake
• 22:25   Re: optimizing query with multiple aggregates Doug Cole

30 October 2009

• 01:39   Re: AMD, Intel and RAID controllers Greg Smith
• 10:18   Re: Modeling a table with arbitrary columns Віталій Тимчишин
• 12:35   Re: sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
• 12:43   Re: database size growing continously Merlin Moncure
• 15:03   Re: sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan Robert Haas
• 19:13   Re: database size growing continously Jeremy Harris
• 19:46   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jesper Krogh
• 19:53   Re: database size growing continously Anj Adu
• 20:02   Re: database size growing continously Greg Stark
• 20:11   Re: database size growing continously Anj Adu
• 20:18   Re: database size growing continously Jeremy Harris
• 22:17   Re: database size growing continously Greg Stark

31 October 2009

• 03:11   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Tom Lane
• 06:20   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Jesper Krogh
• 08:56   Re: Queryplan within FTS/GIN index -search. Greg Stark
• 13:03   Re: Modeling a table with arbitrary columns Robert Haas