Postgres Performance Date Index
[Prev Page][Next Page]
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- Re: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- RE: Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Big Performance drop of Exceptions in UDFs between V11.2 and 13.4
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Postgres using the wrong index index
- Re: Postgres using the wrong index index
- Re: Postgres using the wrong index index
- Re: Postgres using the wrong index index
- Re: Postgres using the wrong index index
- Re: Postgres using the wrong index index
- Re: Postgres using the wrong index index
- Re: PostgreSQL equivalent of UTL_HTTP
- PostgreSQL equivalent of UTL_HTTP
- Re: difference between pg_triggers and information_schema.triggers
- Re: difference between pg_triggers and information_schema.triggers
- difference between pg_triggers and information_schema.triggers
- Re: Postgres using the wrong index index
- Postgres using the wrong index index
- Re: Slow query because lexeme index not used
- Re: Slow query because lexeme index not used
- Slow query because lexeme index not used
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Logical Replication speed-up initial data
- Re: Performance issue with thousands of calls to procedures and functions?
- From: Daniel Westermann (DWE)
- Re: Performance issue with thousands of calls to procedures and functions?
- Re: Performance issue with thousands of calls to procedures and functions?
- From: Daniel Westermann (DWE)
- Re: Performance issue with thousands of calls to procedures and functions?
- Re: Performance issue with thousands of calls to procedures and functions?
- Re: Performance issue with thousands of calls to procedures and functions?
- Re: Performance issue with thousands of calls to procedures and functions?
- Performance issue with thousands of calls to procedures and functions?
- From: Daniel Westermann (DWE)
- Re: Query performance !
- Re: Performance of lateral join
- From: Simen Andreas Andreassen Lønsethagen
- Query performance !
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Performance of lateral join
- Re: Query performance !
- Query performance !
- Re: Performance of lateral join
- Performance of lateral join
- From: Simen Andreas Andreassen Lønsethagen
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Performance Issue on a table
- Performance Issue on a table
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Partitioned table statistics vs autoanalyze
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Partitioned table statistics vs autoanalyze
- Partitioned table statistics vs autoanalyze
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- RE: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Re: Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- Big performance slowdown from 11.2 to 13.3
- From: ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Query Performance
- Query Performance
- Re: Performance benchmark of PG
- Re: Performance benchmark of PG
- Re: Performance benchmark of PG
- Re: Performance benchmark of PG
- Re: Performance benchmark of PG
- Re: Performance benchmark of PG
- Re: Performance benchmark of PG
- Performance benchmark of PG
- Re: Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Re: Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Re: Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Re: Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Re: Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Re: Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Re: Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Re: Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Re: Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Linear slow-down while inserting into a table with an ON INSERT trigger ?
- Re: temporary file log lines
- Re: temporary file log lines
- Re: temporary file log lines
- Re: temporary file log lines
- RE: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Strange execution plan
- RE: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- temporary file log lines
- Re: Strange execution plan
- Re: Strange execution plan
- ERROR: there is no unique or exclusion constraint matching the ON CONFLICT specification
- Re: ETL - sql orchestrator is stuck when there is not sleep() between queries
- Re: ETL - sql orchestrator is stuck when there is not sleep() between queries
- Re: ETL - sql orchestrator is stuck when there is not sleep() between queries
- Re: ETL - sql orchestrator is stuck when there is not sleep() between queries
- Re: ETL - sql orchestrator is stuck when there is not sleep() between queries
- Re: ETL - sql orchestrator is stuck when there is not sleep() between queries
- ETL - sql orchestrator is stuck when there is not sleep() between queries
- Strange execution plan
- Strange execution plan
- Re: hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- Re: hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- Re: slow performance with cursor
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: slow performance with cursor
- Re: slow performance with cursor
- Re: slow performance with cursor
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: slow performance with cursor
- Re: slow performance with cursor
- Re: slow performance with cursor
- slow performance with cursor
- Re: Partition column should be part of PK
- Partition column should be part of PK
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Estimating wal_keep_size
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Estimating wal_keep_size
- Re: Estimating wal_keep_size
- Re: Estimating wal_keep_size
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: PostgreSQL V13 Replication Issue
- Re: Estimating wal_keep_size
- Estimating wal_keep_size
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: PostgreSQL V13 Replication Issue
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- PostgreSQL V13 Replication Issue
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: Master - Slave Replication Window Server
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: Master - Slave Replication Window Server
- Re: Master - Slave Replication Window Server
- From: Rory Campbell-Lange
- Re: overcommit_ratio setting
- Re: overcommit_ratio setting
- Re: Master - Slave Replication Window Server
- Re: Master - Slave Replication Window Server
- Re: overcommit_ratio setting
- Re: Master - Slave Replication Window Server
- From: Rory Campbell-Lange
- Master - Slave Replication Window Server
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: overcommit_ratio setting
- Re: overcommit_ratio setting
- Re: pg_dumpall --exclude-database case folding, was Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- pg_dumpall --exclude-database case folding, was Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- overcommit_ratio setting
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: Page File Size Reached Critical Threshold PostgreSQL V13
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: Page File Size Reached Critical Threshold PostgreSQL V13
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: Page File Size Reached Critical Threshold PostgreSQL V13
- Re: Page File Size Reached Critical Threshold PostgreSQL V13
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Page File Size Reached Critical Threshold PostgreSQL V13
- Re: slow query
- Re: slow query
- Re: waiting for client write
- Re: waiting for client write
- waiting for client write
- Re: slow query
- Re: slow query
- Re: slow query
- Re: slow query
- slow query
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: dexter on AWS RDS auto tune queries
- Re: dexter on AWS RDS auto tune queries
- Re: dexter on AWS RDS auto tune queries
- Re: dexter on AWS RDS auto tune queries
- Re: dexter on AWS RDS auto tune queries
- dexter on AWS RDS auto tune queries
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: query planner not using index, instead using squential scan
- Re: query planner not using index, instead using squential scan
- Re: query planner not using index, instead using squential scan
- Re: query planner not using index, instead using squential scan
- query planner not using index, instead using squential scan
- RE: PgSQL 12 on WinSrv ~3x faster than on Linux
- Re: PgSQL 12 on WinSrv ~3x faster than on Linux
- Re: PgSQL 12 on WinSrv ~3x faster than on Linux
- Re: PgSQL 12 on WinSrv ~3x faster than on Linux
- PgSQL 12 on WinSrv ~3x faster than on Linux
- Re: slow query with inline function on AWS RDS with RDS 24x large
- Re: slow query with inline function on AWS RDS with RDS 24x large
- Re: slow query with inline function on AWS RDS with RDS 24x large
- Re: slow query with inline function on AWS RDS with RDS 24x large
- slow query with inline function on AWS RDS with RDS 24x large
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
- From: Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)
- Re: transaction blocking on COMMIT
- Count (select 1) subquery as constant
- Re: issue partition scan
- Re: issue partition scan
- Re: issue partition scan
- Re: issue partition scan
- issue partition scan
- Re: transaction blocking on COMMIT
- Re: transaction blocking on COMMIT
- Re: transaction blocking on COMMIT
- Re: Optimising outer joins in the presence of non-nullable references
- Re: transaction blocking on COMMIT
- Re: transaction blocking on COMMIT
- Optimising outer joins in the presence of non-nullable references
- From: Philip Lykke Carlsen
- Re: transaction blocking on COMMIT
- transaction blocking on COMMIT
- RE: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- RE: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: logical replication
- Re: logical replication
- logical replication
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Partition with check constraint with "like"
- Re: Index and statistics not used
- Index and statistics not used
- Re: BUG #16968: Planner does not recognize optimization
- Re: BUG #16968: Planner does not recognize optimization
- Re: BUG #16968: Planner does not recognize optimization
- Re: BUG #16968: Planner does not recognize optimization
- Re: BUG #16968: Planner does not recognize optimization
- Re: Very slow "bloat query"
- Re: Very slow "bloat query"
- Re: Very slow "bloat query"
- Re: BUG #16968: Planner does not recognize optimization
- Re: Very slow "bloat query"
- Re: Very slow "bloat query"
- Re: Very slow "bloat query"
- Re: Very slow "bloat query"
- Very slow "bloat query"
- RE: Re: PostgreSQL blocked locks query
- Re: BUG #16968: Planner does not recognize optimization
- Re: PostgreSQL blocked locks query
- PostgreSQL blocked locks query
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- From: Andreas Joseph Krogh
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Very slow Query compared to Oracle / SQL - Server
- Re: 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- Re: 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- Re: 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- Re: 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- Re: 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- Re: 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- Re: 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- Re: 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- Re: 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- 15x slower PreparedStatement vs raw query
- Re: Error while calling proc with table type from Application (npgsql)
- Re: Error while calling proc with table type from Application (npgsql)
- Re: Error while calling proc with table type from Application (npgsql)
- RES: Log number of tuples returned
- Re: Log number of tuples returned
- Log number of tuples returned
- Re: Error while calling proc with table type from Application (npgsql)
- Error while calling proc with table type from Application
- Re: Order of execution
- From: Jean-Christophe Boggio
- Order of execution
- Re: Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- Re: Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- From: Rory Campbell-Lange
- Re: Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- Re: Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- Re: Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- From: Rory Campbell-Lange
- Re: Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- Re: Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- Re: Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- Re: Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- Does btrfs on Linux have a negative performance impact for PostgreSQL 13?
- Re: hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- Re: hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- Re: hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- Re: hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- Re: hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- Re: hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- Re: hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- hint in determining effective_io_concurrency
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: Planning performance problem (67626.278ms)
- Re: OLEDB for PostgreSQL
- Re: OLEDB for PostgreSQL
- Re: Most proper partitioning form on an integer column
- Most proper partitioning form on an integer column
- Re: Disabling options lowers the estimated cost of a query
- Re: Why is there a tenfold difference between Postgres's alleged query execution time and packet transmission time?
- Re: Disabling options lowers the estimated cost of a query
- Re: Disabling options lowers the estimated cost of a query
- Re: Strange behavior once statistics are there
- From: Daniel Westermann (DWE)
- Re: Disabling options lowers the estimated cost of a query
- Re: Disabling options lowers the estimated cost of a query
- Re: Strange behavior once statistics are there
- Re: Is there a way to change current time?
- Re: Is there a way to change current time?
- Re: Is there a way to change current time?
- Re: Is there a way to change current time?
- Re: Is there a way to change current time?
- Is there a way to change current time?
- Strange behavior once statistics are there
- From: Daniel Westermann (DWE)
- Why is there a tenfold difference between Postgres's alleged query execution time and packet transmission time?
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- RE: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- RE: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- RE: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- RE: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- From: Nikolay Samokhvalov
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- RE: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- RE: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
- Re: INSERTS waiting with wait_event is "transactionid"
- Re: INSERTS waiting with wait_event is "transactionid"
- INSERTS waiting with wait_event is "transactionid"
- RE: procedure using CURSOR to insert is extremely slow
- Re: procedure using CURSOR to insert is extremely slow
- RE: procedure using CURSOR to insert is extremely slow
- RE: procedure using CURSOR to insert is extremely slow
- Re: str_aggr function not wokring
- Re: str_aggr function not wokring
- Re: procedure using CURSOR to insert is extremely slow
- RE: procedure using CURSOR to insert is extremely slow
- RE: str_aggr function not wokring
- Re: procedure using CURSOR to insert is extremely slow
- From: Hervé Schweitzer (HER)
- str_aggr function not wokring
- procedure using CURSOR to insert is extremely slow
- Re: select count(*) is slow
- Re: SHARED LOCKS , EXCLUSIVE LOCKS, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE LOCKS
- Re: select count(*) is slow
- Re: select count(*) is slow
- Re: select count(*) is slow
- Re: Substitute for synonym in Oracle after migration to postgres
- select count(*) is slow
- Re: Substitute for synonym in Oracle after migration to postgres
- From: hubert depesz lubaczewski
- Re: Substitute for synonym in Oracle after migration to postgres
- Substitute for synonym in Oracle after migration to postgres
- Re: SHARED LOCKS , EXCLUSIVE LOCKS, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE LOCKS
- PosgtgreSQL hot standby reading WAL from muli-attached volume?
- Re: SHARED LOCKS , EXCLUSIVE LOCKS, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE LOCKS
- Re: SHARED LOCKS , EXCLUSIVE LOCKS, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE LOCKS
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- SHARED LOCKS , EXCLUSIVE LOCKS, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE LOCKS
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- SELECT Query taking 200 ms on PostgreSQL compared to 4 ms on Oracle after migration.
- Re: High availability management tool.
- Re: High availability management tool.
- Re: High availability management tool.
- Re: High-volume writes - what is the max throughput possible
- Re: High-volume writes - what is the max throughput possible
- High-volume writes - what is the max throughput possible
- From: Geervan Hayatnagarkar
- Re: How do we hint a query to use index in postgre
- Re: Odd (slow) plan choice with min/max
- Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)
- Re: Odd (slow) plan choice with min/max
- Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)
- Re: Odd (slow) plan choice with min/max
- Re: Odd (slow) plan choice with min/max
- Re: Odd (slow) plan choice with min/max
- Odd (slow) plan choice with min/max
- Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)
- Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)
- Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)
- SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)
- Re: How do we hint a query to use index in postgre
- Re: How do we hint a query to use index in postgre
- How do we hint a query to use index in postgre
- Re: Extremely inefficient merge-join
- Re: Extremely inefficient merge-join
- Extremely inefficient merge-join
- Re: wide table, many many partitions, poor query performance
- Re: wide table, many many partitions, poor query performance
- wide table, many many partitions, poor query performance
- Re: FreeBSD UFS & fsync
- Re: FreeBSD UFS & fsync
- Re: Is there a known bug with SKIP LOCKED and "tuple to be locked was already moved to another partition due to concurrent update"?
- Re: Is there a known bug with SKIP LOCKED and "tuple to be locked was already moved to another partition due to concurrent update"?
- Re: Fwd: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- From: Francesco De Angelis
- Re: FreeBSD UFS & fsync
- Re: FreeBSD UFS & fsync
- Re: Is there a known bug with SKIP LOCKED and "tuple to be locked was already moved to another partition due to concurrent update"?
- Re: FreeBSD UFS & fsync
- Re: Fwd: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- From: Francesco De Angelis
- Re: Fwd: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- Re: Fwd: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- Re: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- From: Francesco De Angelis
- Re: Users grants with setting options
- Re: Users grants with setting options
- Users grants with setting options
- Re: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- Re: Slow query performance inside a transaction on a clean database
- Re: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- Re: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- RE: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- Fwd: different execution time for the same query (and same DB status)
- From: Francesco De Angelis
- Slow query performance inside a transaction on a clean database
- Re: Potential performance issues related to group by and covering index
- Re: tables meta data collection
- tables meta data collection
- Re: Potential performance issues related to group by and covering index
- Re: Potential performance issues related to group by and covering index
- High availability management tool.
- Re: Performance issues related to left join and order by
- Re: Potential performance issues related to group by and covering index
- Re: Potential performance issues related to group by and covering index
- Performance issues related to left join and order by
- Potential performance issues related to group by and covering index
- Re: Potential performance issues
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Potential performance issues
- Re: Potential performance issues
- Re: Potential performance issues
- Re: Potential performance issues
- Re: Potential performance issues
- Re: Potential performance issues
- Re: Potential performance issues
- Re: Potential performance issues
- Potential performance issues
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Disabling options lowers the estimated cost of a query
- Disabling options lowers the estimated cost of a query
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Postgres performance comparing GCP and AWS
- Re: FreeBSD UFS & fsync
- Re: FreeBSD UFS & fsync
- Re: FreeBSD UFS & fsync
- FreeBSD UFS & fsync
- Re: Autovacuum not functioning for large tables but it is working for few other small tables.
- RE: Autovacuum not functioning for large tables but it is working for few other small tables.
- Re: Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Re: Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Re: Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Re: Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Re: Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Re: Query performance issue
- Re: Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Re: Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Re: Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Re: Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Slow query and wrong row estimates for CTE
- Re: Query performance issue
- Re: Query performance issue
- Query performance issue
- Understanding logical replication lag
- Re: High COMMIT times
- RE: Need information on how MM frees up disk space (vaccum) after scheduled DB cleanup by BGwCronScript/BGwLogCleaner
- Re: How to deal with analyze gathering irrelevant stats
- Re: How to deal with analyze gathering irrelevant stats
- Re: How to deal with analyze gathering irrelevant stats
[Index of Archives]
[Postgresql General]
[Postgresql PHP]
[PHP Home]
[PHP on Windows]
[Yosemite]