Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: vacuum locking

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rob Nagler <nagler(at)bivio(dot)biz>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: vacuum locking
Date: 2003-10-30 00:03:18
Message-ID: 24018.1067472198@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Rob Nagler <nagler(at)bivio(dot)biz> writes:
> q5 and q6 are too complex to discuss here,

How do you expect us to get better if you don't show us the problems?

BTW, have you tried any of this with a 7.4beta release?  Another project
that I'm aware of saw several bottlenecks in their Oracle-centric code
go away when they tested 7.4 instead of 7.3.  For instance, there is
hash aggregation capability, which would probably solve the aggregate
query problem you were complaining about in
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2003-10/msg00640.php

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2003-10-30 00:55:07
Subject: Re: vacuum locking
Previous:From: Rob NaglerDate: 2003-10-29 23:32:18
Subject: Re: vacuum locking

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group