Re: performace review
От | Jonathan Vanasco |
---|---|
Тема | Re: performace review |
Дата | |
Msg-id | BB4C0D53-147B-480A-A175-0DB5848C138E@2xlp.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: performace review (Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
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.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: