From: | Ben-Nes Yonatan <da(at)canaan(dot)co(dot)il> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Planner create a slow plan without an available index |
Date: | 2005-08-30 23:27:30 |
Message-ID: | 4314EB62.1020003@canaan.co.il |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
>
>>rtree works on multidimesional (geometric) data. It can do range tests
>>(is object A to the left of object B) but it's only applicable if your
>>conditions can be interpreted that way.
>
>
>>GiST is for creating custom index types, hardly likely to be useful
>>in your case.
>
>
> Actually either rtree or GIST should be able to do something useful with
> this, since it's basically a 1-D overlap query. The main problem with
> GIST is to find a suitable opclass, since there aren't any in the core
> system. Possibly contrib/seg could be used.
>
> regards, tom lane
Ok first of all thanks guys as always for your help, and I will try to
use rtree to improve my query (hopefuly ill be able to come back and say
that it worked :)).
I got another question which is not connected and probably its just me
being paranoid late at night but still... :)
at chapter "21.1.3. Preventing transaction ID wraparound failures" of
the postgresql manual its written the following info:
"Prior to PostgreSQL 7.2, the only defense against XID wraparound was to
re-initdb at least every 4 billion transactions. This of course was not
very satisfactory for high-traffic sites, so a better solution has been
devised. The new approach allows a server to remain up indefinitely,
without initdb or any sort of restart. The price is this maintenance
requirement: every table in the database must be vacuumed at least once
every billion transactions."
My postgresql version is 8.01 (I should have mentioned that at start no? :))
Now again im probably just paranoid but when I'm starting a transaction
and in it im making more then 4 billions diffrent queries
(select,insert,update,truncate...) and then im closing it, its counted
as only one transaction right? (should I duck to avoid the manual? ;))
As always thanks alot!
Ben-Nes Yonatan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-08-30 23:47:04 | Re: update functions locking tables |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-08-30 23:16:57 | Re: Is this still valid for current Postgresql versions? |