| From: | Tim Uckun <timuckun(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Brian Hirt <bhirt(at)me(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Updates, deletes and inserts are very slow. What can I do make them bearable? |
| Date: | 2010-10-22 07:54:24 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTim1vWwCo62N3v-hEye3Hf2sdhJZE7mUkxez0bxh@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Agreed. But when Tom pointed out the problem in your query you were
> quite sure you couldn't be wrong. When I asked you to run explain to
> see what kind of row estimate you got, I got no answer. This was a
> query problem not a hardware tuning problem.
>
> The best step for getting a good answer is forming a good question.
>
> So, has changing the query made it faster? Did explain show what I
> expect, a huge cartesian product? Just guessing.
>
Yes changing the query fixed the problem. When I replied to Tom I
was under the impression that my redaction of the query was causing a
confusion.
In my defense the query I posted works fine in mssql server and mysql.
I just presumed it would work the same in postgres. I guess that was
my mistake.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mathieu De Zutter | 2010-10-22 08:26:33 | Re: Question on Explain : Index Scan |
| Previous Message | John R Pierce | 2010-10-22 07:28:33 | Re: compile error in libpq program |