Search Postgresql Archives

Re: performace review

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Oct 7, 2006, at 6:41 PM, Chris Browne wrote:
This could also be a situation where adding a few useful indexes might
fix a lot of ills.  Better to try to help fix the problems so as to
help show that the comparisons are way off base rather than to simply
cast stones...

i'm too tight for cash to afford being wrong right now...

but I'd otherwise bet that the issue was from not vacuum analyzing

i've routinely had 3,9,12, i think even a 14 table join that would take forever to run...

until i realized that i added/dropped an index and forgot to run analyze. then they all work within a matter of split seconds. all of them.

i've seen not just dramatic, but drastic , changes in performance and the planner's output before and after a vacuum analyze of the db.

i'm really confident thats the problem. unfortunately, they have a max_db contact email, and not a postgres. so i don't know who to check with to see if they ran it or not.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Postgresql Jobs]     [Postgresql Admin]     [Postgresql Performance]     [Linux Clusters]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Postgresql & PHP]     [Yosemite]
  Powered by Linux