Re: Performance Problem with postgresql 9.03, 8GB RAM,Quadcore Processor Server--Need help!!!!!!!

From: Mohamed Hashim <nmdhashim(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Mario Weilguni <roadrunner6(at)gmx(dot)at>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance Problem with postgresql 9.03, 8GB RAM,Quadcore Processor Server--Need help!!!!!!!
Date: 2011-11-08 03:21:35
Message-ID: CACBfhZP7OUL+UpauYYSuNbOG-tGbB+TwKzhY7FkwrdvxDaM8Jg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-performance

Hi all,

Thanks for all your responses.

Sorry for late response

Earlier we used Postgres8.3.10 with Desktop computer (as server) and
configuration of the system (I2 core with 4GB RAM) and also the application
was slow i dint change any postgres config settings.

May be because of low config We thought the aplication is slow so we opted
to go for higher configuration server(with RAID 1) which i mentioned
earlier.

I thought the application will go fast but unfortunately there is no
improvement so i tried to change the postgres config settings and trying to
tune my queries wherever possible but still i was not able
to..........improve the performance..

So will it helpful if we try GIST or GIN for integer array[] colum
(source_detail) with enable_seqscan=off and default_statistics_target=1000?

Regards
Hashim

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Mario Weilguni <roadrunner6(at)gmx(dot)at> wrote:

> Am 03.11.2011 17:08, schrieb Tomas Vondra:
>
>> On 3 Listopad 2011, 16:02, Mario Weilguni wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>> No doubt about that, querying tables using conditions on array columns is
>> not the best direction in most cases, especially when those tables are
>> huge.
>>
>> Still, the interesting part here is that the OP claims this worked just
>> fine in the older version and after an upgrade the performance suddenly
>> dropped. This could be caused by many things, and we're just guessing
>> because we don't have any plans from the old version.
>>
>> Tomas
>>
>>
>>
> Not really, Mohamed always said he has 9.0.3, Marcus Engene wrote about
> problems after the migration from 8.x to 9.x. Or did I miss something here?
>
> Regards,
> Mario
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)**
> org <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/**mailpref/pgsql-performance<http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance>
>

--
Regards
Mohamed Hashim.N
Mobile:09894587678

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-11-08 04:30:46 Re: Behavior of negative OFFSET
Previous Message Ondrej Ivanič 2011-11-08 01:28:47 Postgres vs other Postgres based MPP implementations

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bhakti Ghatkar 2011-11-08 06:33:21 Re: Error while vacuuming
Previous Message Jay Levitt 2011-11-08 01:56:42 Re: Subquery in a JOIN not getting restricted?