Query Progress (was: Performance With Joins on Large Tables)

From: "Bucky Jordan" <bjordan(at)lumeta(dot)com>
To: "Joshua Marsh" <icub3d(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
Cc: <bujordan(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Query Progress (was: Performance With Joins on Large Tables)
Date: 2006-09-13 18:19:04
Message-ID: 78ED28FACE63744386D68D8A9D1CF5D4104D08@MAIL.corp.lumeta.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance


Setting to 0.1 finally gave me the result I was looking for. I know
that the index scan is faster though. The seq scan never finished (i
killed it after 24+ hours) and I'm running the query now with indexes
and it's progressing nicely (will probably take 4 hours).

In regards to "progressing nicely (will probably take 4 hours)" - is
this just an estimate or is there some way to get progress status (or
something similar- e.g. on step 6 of 20 planned steps) on a query in pg?
I looked through Chap 24, Monitoring DB Activity, but most of that looks
like aggregate stats. Trying to relate these to a particular query
doesn't really seem feasible.

This would be useful in the case where you have a couple of long running
transactions or stored procedures doing analysis and you'd like to give
the user some feedback where you're at.

Thanks,

Bucky

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marcin Mank 2006-09-13 18:39:59 Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables
Previous Message Christoph Nelles 2006-09-13 17:36:29 Unsubscribe