From: | Bendik R(dot)Johansen <bendik(dot)johansen(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Perform <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Slow update |
Date: | 2005-04-12 15:37:42 |
Message-ID: | 9e217f24329eaf693ab6921123213178@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Yes, I tried dropping it but it did not make a difference.
Could the table be corrupt or something?
Well, the important thing is that I now know that this is not typical
for PostgreSQL, so I will not have to rethink my whole project.
Thanks, so far.
On Apr 12, 2005, at 17:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Bendik R. Johansen" <bendik(dot)johansen(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Below is the schema for the table i will be using. I tried dropping
>> the
>> index, but it did not help.
>
>> Indexes:
>> "records_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (id)
>> "records_category_idx" gist (category)
>> "records_cid_idx" btree (cid)
>> "records_uid_idx" btree (uid)
>
> Hmm ... my suspicion would fall first on the GIST index, to tell you
> the
> truth. Did you try dropping that one?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-04-12 15:40:38 | Re: Slow update |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-04-12 15:16:46 | Re: Slow update |