• Text Size: Normal / Large
• Donate
• Contact

Section Navigation

• Community
• Contributors
• Mailing Lists
  • Subscribe
  • User lists
    • pgsql-admin
    • pgsql-advocacy
    • pgsql-announce
    • pgsql-bugs
    • pgsql-docs
    • pgsql-general
    • pgsql-jobs
    • pgsql-novice
    • pgsql-performance
    • pgsql-php
    • pgsql-sql
    • pgsql-students
  • Developer lists
  • Regional lists
  • Associations
  • User groups
  • Project lists
  • Inactive lists
• IRC
• Featured Users
• International Sites
• Propaganda
• Resources
• Weekly News
• Community login
  • Profile
  • Lost password

pgsql-performance 2010-11 Chronological Index (1/3)

• Thread Index
• [Prev Page]
• [Next Page]

• 01 December 2010
  • Re: BBU Cache vs. spindles Bruce Momjian (03:55)
  • Re: BBU Cache vs. spindles Bruce Momjian (03:13)
  • Re: BBU Cache vs. spindles Bruce Momjian (03:07)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Joshua D. Drake (01:48)
  • Re: Question about subselect/IN performance bricklen (01:44)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Pierre C (00:51)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mario Splivalo (00:00)
• 30 November 2010
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mark Kirkwood (23:50)
  • Re: Question about subselect/IN performance T.H. (23:42)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mario Splivalo (23:24)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mario Splivalo (23:22)
  • Re: Question about subselect/IN performance Kevin Grittner (22:55)
  • Re: Simple database, multiple instances? Pierre C (22:35)
  • Question about subselect/IN performance T.H. (18:19)
  • Re: Simple database, multiple instances? Maciek Sakrejda (17:16)
  • Re: postgresql statements are waiting Scott Marlowe (16:55)
  • Re: postgresql statements are waiting Kevin Grittner (16:53)
  • Re: tidscan not work ? Pg 8.4.5 + WinXP Tom Lane (16:50)
  • Re: tidscan not work ? Pg 8.4.5 + WinXP Kevin Grittner (16:44)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mladen Gogala (16:26)
  • Re: Simple database, multiple instances? Mario Splivalo (12:31)
  • Re: Simple database, multiple instances? Dimitri Fontaine (11:46)
  • tidscan not work ? Pg 8.4.5 + WinXP pasman pasmański (11:43)
  • postgresql statements are waiting bakkiya (11:38)
  • Re: MVCC performance issue Robert Haas (00:22)
• 29 November 2010
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Pierre C (16:53)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Pierre C (16:48)
  • Re: Full Text index is not using during OR operation Oleg Bartunov (15:03)
  • Re: Full Text index is not using during OR operation Tobias Brox (14:32)
  • Re: Full Text index is not using during OR operation AI Rumman (14:03)
  • Re: Full Text index is not using during OR operation Oleg Bartunov (12:38)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mario Splivalo (12:30)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mario Splivalo (12:24)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mark Kirkwood (07:11)
  • Full Text index is not using during OR operation AI Rumman (07:00)
  • Re: Hi- Sleeptime reduction Kevin Grittner (05:10)
  • Hi- Sleeptime reduction aaliya zarrin (04:39)
• 28 November 2010
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Pierre C (22:17)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mario Splivalo (19:09)
  • Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Pierre C (19:03)
  • SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow Mario Splivalo (12:12)
  • Simple database, multiple instances? Mario Splivalo (12:02)
• 26 November 2010
  • Re: CPUs for new databases Greg Smith (22:30)
  • Re: CPUs for new databases Kevin Grittner (17:46)
  • Re: CPUs for new databases Christian Elmerot @ One.com (16:39)
  • Re: Update problem on large table bricklen (16:00)
  • Re: Optimizing query pasman pasmański (15:06)
  • Update problem on large table felix (14:22)
  • Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema Robert Klemme (11:38)
  • Re: Optimizing query Pierre C (09:53)
  • Re: Performance under contention Ivan Voras (02:09)
  • Re: Performance under contention Greg Smith (02:00)
• 25 November 2010
  • Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema tv (15:46)
  • Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema Divakar Singh (14:53)
  • Re: Performance under contention Ivan Voras (12:39)
  • Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema tv (12:25)
  • Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema Andres Freund (12:10)
  • Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema tv (12:09)
  • Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema Thomas Kellerer (12:03)
  • Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema tv (12:02)
  • Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema Divakar Singh (11:37)
• 24 November 2010
  • problem with from_collapse_limit and joined views Markus Schulz (19:02)
  • Optimizing query pasman pasmański (14:48)
  • Re: Performance under contention Kevin Grittner (14:46)
  • Re: Performance under contention Vitalii Tymchyshyn (08:58)
  • Re: postmaster consuming /lots/ of memory with hash aggregate. why? Robert Haas (03:11)
  • Re: Performance under contention Ivan Voras (01:10)
  • Re: Performance under contention Craig Ringer (00:11)
• 23 November 2010
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Merlin Moncure (14:20)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Humair Mohammed (00:12)
• 22 November 2010
  • Re: Performance under contention Kevin Grittner (17:47)
  • Re: Performance under contention Ivan Voras (15:38)
  • Re: Performance under contention Kevin Grittner (15:26)
  • Re: Slow SELECT on small table Kevin Grittner (15:12)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql tv (12:22)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Samuel Gendler (11:02)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql tv (11:00)
  • Re: Performance under contention Omar Kilani (10:02)
  • Slow SELECT on small table Martin Boese (08:59)
  • Re: Performance under contention Jignesh Shah (06:55)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Humair Mohammed (06:32)
  • Re: Performance under contention Ivan Voras (02:19)
  • Re: Performance under contention Kevin Grittner (01:47)
  • Performance under contention Ivan Voras (00:16)
• 21 November 2010
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Robert Haas (18:56)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Tom Lane (17:16)
  • Re: autovacuum blocks the operations of other manual vacuum Alvaro Herrera (16:25)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql tv (15:57)
  • Re: Should changing offset in LIMIT change query plan (at all/so early)? Kevin Grittner (15:44)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql tv (15:42)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql tv (15:36)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Kevin Grittner (15:23)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Pavel Stehule (15:14)
  • Re: autovacuum blocks the operations of other manual vacuum kuopo (14:56)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Humair Mohammed (14:53)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql tv (14:34)
  • Re: autovacuum blocks the operations of other manual vacuum kuopo (14:17)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Pavel Stehule (11:39)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Humair Mohammed (06:25)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Pavel Stehule (06:21)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Humair Mohammed (06:00)
• 20 November 2010
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Bob Lunney (16:28)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Dimitri (10:16)
  • Re: autovacuum blocks the operations of other manual vacuum tv (04:43)
  • Re: autovacuum blocks the operations of other manual vacuum Alvaro Herrera (01:49)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Robert Klemme (00:16)
• 19 November 2010
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Chris Browne (17:25)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Jignesh Shah (14:52)
  • Should changing offset in LIMIT change query plan (at all/so early)? goran (12:55)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Louis-David Mitterrand (09:50)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Louis-David Mitterrand (09:46)
• 18 November 2010
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Kevin Grittner (21:00)
  • Re: Low disk performance? tv (13:33)
  • Low disk performance? Martin Chlupac (11:09)
  • executor stats / page reclaims Uwe Bartels (10:10)
  • Re: autovacuum blocks the operations of other manual vacuum kuopo (07:11)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Pavel Stehule (06:15)
• 17 November 2010
  • Re: Anyone seen this kind of lock pileup? Tom Lane (23:56)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Greg Smith (23:43)
  • Re: Anyone seen this kind of lock pileup? Josh Berkus (23:42)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Ivan Voras (23:28)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Tom Lane (23:21)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Scott Carey (23:18)
  • Re: Anyone seen this kind of lock pileup? Ivan Voras (22:54)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Greg Smith (22:48)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Mladen Gogala (22:06)
  • Re: Anyone seen this kind of lock pileup? Josh Berkus (22:03)
  • Re: Anyone seen this kind of lock pileup? Tom Lane (21:59)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Rich (21:52)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Humair Mohammed (21:50)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Jon Nelson (21:44)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Greg Smith (21:25)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Eric Comeau (21:16)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Tomas Vondra (20:47)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Scott Carey (20:17)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Scott Carey (19:25)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Scott Carey (18:57)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Scott Carey (18:46)
  • Anyone seen this kind of lock pileup? Josh Berkus (17:38)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Merlin Moncure (17:28)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Ivan Voras (16:13)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Lutz Steinborn (16:01)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Digimer (15:29)
  • Re: How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins J. Roeleveld (15:25)
  • How to achieve sustained disk performance of 1.25 GB write for 5 mins Eric Comeau (15:01)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Pavel Stehule (04:48)
  • Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql Humair Mohammed (04:00)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Robert Haas (03:07)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Tom Lane (01:22)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Tom Lane (01:18)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Josh Berkus (01:18)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Andres Freund (01:12)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Tom Lane (01:04)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Andres Freund (01:01)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Tom Lane (00:51)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Andres Freund (00:30)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Mladen Gogala (00:05)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Marti Raudsepp (00:01)
• 16 November 2010
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Tom Lane (23:31)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Josh Berkus (23:25)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Robert Haas (23:10)
  • Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? Greg Smith (20:39)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Chris Browne (16:54)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Harald Fuchs (16:28)
  • Re: autovacuum blocks the operations of other manual vacuum Alvaro Herrera (15:27)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Jayadevan M (11:57)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Louis-David Mitterrand (11:28)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Arjen van der Meijden (11:24)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Pavel Stehule (11:12)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Louis-David Mitterrand (11:07)
  • Re: best db schema for time series data? Pavel Stehule (11:04)
  • best db schema for time series data? Louis-David Mitterrand (10:57)
  • Re: Pavel Stehule (07:12)
  • Re: Mark Kirkwood (07:08)
  • Re: Jayadevan M (07:02)
• 15 November 2010
  • Re: Difference between explain analyze and real execution time Artur Zając (21:30)
  • Re: Difference between explain analyze and real execution time Tom Lane (21:04)
  • Re: Difference between explain analyze and real execution time Artur Zając (20:44)
  • [no subject] Humair Mohammed (20:14)
  • Re: Difference between explain analyze and real execution time Robert Haas (19:39)

• Thread Index
• [Prev Page]
• [Next Page]