Mailing lists [pgsql-performance]

1 July 2014

• 00:52   Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly Jeff Frost
• 02:04   Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly Tom Lane
• 02:17   Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly Andres Freund
• 02:57   Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly Jeff Frost
• 04:11   Re: Volatility - docs vs behaviour? Craig Ringer
• 05:15   Re: Volatility - docs vs behaviour? Tom Lane
• 10:47   Re: GIST optimization to limit calls to operator on sub nodes Pujol Mathieu
• 12:48   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Mark Kirkwood
• 13:04   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Mark Kirkwood
• 13:13   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Andres Freund
• 19:26   Re: Volatility - docs vs behaviour? Merlin Moncure
• 20:12   Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly Jeff Frost
• 22:20   Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly Tom Lane
• 23:08   Re: Guidelines on best indexing strategy for varying searches on 20+ columns Niels Kristian Schjødt

2 July 2014

• 11:51   fragmention issue with ext4: e4defrag? Marc Mamin
• 16:10   Hash Join node sometimes slow Dave Roberge
• 17:11   Re: Hash Join node sometimes slow Tom Lane
• 21:01   Re: fragmention issue with ext4: e4defrag? Kevin Grittner
• 22:01   Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly Andres Freund
• 22:15   Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly Tom Lane

3 July 2014

• 12:34   Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly Simon Riggs
• 18:14   Re: Hash Join node sometimes slow Dave Roberge

4 July 2014

• 04:44   DB sessions 100 times of DB connections Huang, Suya
• 05:00   Re: DB sessions 100 times of DB connections Huang, Suya

5 July 2014

• 00:04   stored procedure suddenly runs slowly in HOT STANDBY but fast in primary piuschan
• 07:31   Re: stored procedure suddenly runs slowly in HOT STANDBY but fast in primary Tom Lane

7 July 2014

• 17:00   PGSQL 9.3 - billion rows Nicolas Paris
• 17:27   Re: PGSQL 9.3 - billion rows Felipe Santos
• 21:39   Re: stored procedure suddenly runs slowly in HOT STANDBY but fast in primary piuschan
• 22:41   Re: PGSQL 9.3 - billion rows Sékine Coulibaly

8 July 2014

• 19:28   Re: DB sessions 100 times of DB connections Steve Crawford

9 July 2014

• 03:06   Re: PGSQL 9.3 - billion rows Josh Berkus

11 July 2014

• 03:36   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Mark Kirkwood
• 07:14   GIN index not used Huang, Suya
• 07:45   Re: GIN index not used Andreas Kretschmer
• 07:56   Re: GIN index not used Tom Lane
• 08:01   Re: GIN index not used Andreas Kretschmer
• 08:26   Re: GIN index not used Huang, Suya
• 08:43   Re: GIN index not used Tom Lane
• 08:48   Re: GIN index not used Huang, Suya
• 11:22   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Andres Freund
• 11:54   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Mark Kirkwood
• 16:19   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Kevin Grittner

12 July 2014

• 11:31   Re: GIN index not used Emre Hasegeli

14 July 2014

• 01:56   Query Performance question Magers, James
• 03:58   Re: Query Performance question Tomas Vondra
• 05:21   Re: Query Performance question Magers, James
• 10:07   Re: Query Performance question Thomas Kellerer
• 16:18   Re: Query Performance question Magers, James
• 16:48   Re: Query Performance question Thomas Kellerer
• 17:01   Re: Query Performance question Magers, James
• 17:48   Re: Query Performance question Tomas Vondra
• 19:02   Re: Query Performance question Magers, James
• 19:29   Re: Query Performance question Tomas Vondra
• 20:16   Re: Query Performance question Magers, James

17 July 2014

• 02:58   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Mark Kirkwood
• 03:05   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Mark Kirkwood

18 July 2014

• 01:47   Building multiple indexes on one table. Chris Ruprecht
• 02:21   Re: Building multiple indexes on one table. Claudio Freire
• 13:52   Blocking every 20 sec while mass copying. Benjamin Dugast
• 14:11   Re: Blocking every 20 sec while mass copying. Albe Laurenz
• 18:17   Re: Blocking every 20 sec while mass copying. Guillaume Cottenceau
• 20:56   Re: Blocking every 20 sec while mass copying. Jeff Janes

21 July 2014

• 11:02   Re: Blocking every 20 sec while mass copying. Albe Laurenz
• 17:19   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Kevin Grittner

22 July 2014

• 00:09   Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions johno
• 00:31   Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions David G Johnston
• 00:44   Re: Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions johno
• 00:54   Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions David G Johnston
• 01:03   Re: Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions johno
• 01:14   Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions David G Johnston
• 01:22   Re: Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions johno
• 05:53   Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions Tom Lane
• 08:57   Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions johno
• 09:15   Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions Tom Lane
• 10:38   estimate btree index size without creating Евгений Селявка
• 13:42   Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd conditions johno

23 July 2014

• 12:39   Re: Blocking every 20 sec while mass copying. Benjamin Dugast
• 16:21   Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 20:35   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Douglas J Hunley
• 22:40   Re: Building multiple indexes on one table. Marc Mamin
• 22:50   Re: Building multiple indexes on one table. Claudio Freire
• 23:21   Re: Building multiple indexes on one table. Felipe Santos

24 July 2014

• 04:18   High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Reza Taheri
• 04:30   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 07:57   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Craig Ringer
• 08:01   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Craig Ringer
• 17:03   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Kevin Grittner
• 17:22   Debugging writing load Borodin Vladimir
• 22:50   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Reza Taheri
• 22:51   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Reza Taheri

25 July 2014

• 04:30   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Craig Ringer
• 04:53   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Tom Lane
• 06:26   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 12:20   Re: Debugging writing load Craig Ringer
• 17:24   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 21:58   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Reza Taheri

26 July 2014

• 00:36   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Ryan Johnson
• 00:47   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Josh Berkus
• 02:24   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Reza Taheri
• 13:46   Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Jiří Nádvorník
• 22:55   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Reza Taheri

27 July 2014

• 00:06   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Ryan Johnson
• 02:34   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Reza Taheri
• 02:51   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Ryan Johnson
• 09:05   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Vitalii Tymchyshyn
• 17:35   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Jiří Nádvorník
• 18:35   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Craig James
• 18:44   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 19:28   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Tom Lane
• 22:05   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Marc Mamin
• 23:09   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Vitalii Tymchyshyn

28 July 2014

• 04:19   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 06:58   Re: High rate of transaction failure with the Serializable Isolation Level Craig Ringer
• 10:01   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 16:10   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 20:29   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Jeff Janes
• 22:55   Re: Full text search with ORDER BY performance issue worthy7

29 July 2014

• 03:10   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 11:21   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 12:44   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Jiří Nádvorník
• 13:11   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Jiří Nádvorník
• 17:47   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Craig James
• 20:27   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Jeff Janes
• 20:50   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Jiří Nádvorník
• 21:36   Re: Cursor + upsert (astronomical data) Jeff Janes

30 July 2014

• 04:13   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 04:40   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Mark Kirkwood
• 06:12   Why you should turn on Checksums with SSDs Josh Berkus
• 07:05   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 07:16   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 11:42   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Tomas Vondra
• 12:02   Re: Why you should turn on Checksums with SSDs Tomas Vondra
• 13:03   Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table Rural Hunter
• 15:40   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Tom Lane
• 15:47   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Tomas Vondra
• 21:43   Slow create temp table Clinton Adams
• 21:53   Re: Why you should turn on Checksums with SSDs Merlin Moncure

31 July 2014

• 02:28   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Mark Kirkwood
• 02:35   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Mark Kirkwood
• 02:36   Re: 60 core performance with 9.3 Matt Clarkson
• 23:43   Setting a default format for timestamp Ferrell, Denise CTR NSWCDD, Z11
• 23:59   Re: [ADMIN] Setting a default format for timestamp Scott Whitney