| From: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, sthomas(at)peak6(dot)com, Maciek Sakrejda <msakrejda(at)truviso(dot)com>, felix <crucialfelix(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Really really slow select count(*) |
| Date: | 2011-02-08 21:09:46 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTin=oEUV1H+WrFAsvtXt3=XVkrx7HmXhOoVSrgnP@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 22:09, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Kevin and I both suggested a "fast plus timeout then immediate" behavior is
> what many users seem to want. My comments were at
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg01145.php ; for an
> example of how fast shutdown can fail see
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2009-03/msg00062.php
True, I've hit that a few times too.
Seems that a better solution would be implementing a new -m option
that does this transparently?
Regards,
Marti
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-02-08 21:20:23 | Re: Really really slow select count(*) |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2011-02-08 20:09:40 | Re: Really really slow select count(*) |