From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
---|---|
To: | Somasekhar Bangalore <sbangalore(at)zensutra(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jaime Casanova <el_vigia_ec(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org, K Harikumar <kharikumar(at)zensutra(dot)com>, Anoop G <ganoop(at)zensutra(dot)com>, Sanjay Rathod <srathod(at)zensutra(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL][HACKERS]data fragmentation |
Date: | 2003-12-16 22:03:14 |
Message-ID: | 20031216220314.GE14503@dcc.uchile.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 09:59:23AM +0530, Somasekhar Bangalore wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I too had the same problem; There was one query which used to take a
> very long time. What I did was, I took a backup of the whole database.
> Reinstalled postgres on a different mount point and restored the data
> back into the new database. Now my queries are running faster. Try it.
> All the very best.
You could instead apply CLUSTER to the affected tables. (I'm assuming you
already apply VACUUM periodically and REINDEX as appropiate)
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"Everybody understands Mickey Mouse. Few understand Hermann Hesse.
Hardly anybody understands Einstein. And nobody understands Emperor Norton."
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | sachdev | 2003-12-17 04:02:31 | Re: comparing with oracle |
Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-12-16 21:05:19 | Re: Postgresql on software RAID |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rick Gigger | 2003-12-16 22:58:27 | Re: add column sillyness |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2003-12-16 22:01:16 | Re: Strange permission problem regarding pg_settings |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2003-12-16 22:37:31 | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch |
Previous Message | Jon Jensen | 2003-12-16 21:48:18 | Re: Resurrecting pg_upgrade |