From: | "Sam Liddicott" <sam(dot)liddicott(at)ananova(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Steve Atkins" <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: \d very, very, very slow |
Date: | 2002-08-05 07:47:41 |
Message-ID: | D38A0FCD5830E848992DF2D4AF5F6F4FE22508@conwy.leeds.ananova.internal |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: 04 August 2002 06:52
> To: Steve Atkins
> Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] \d very, very, very slow
>
>
> Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> writes:
> > So is 15-20 seconds for \d unusual?
>
> Very.
>
> > If so, where should I start looking to see what's broken?
>
> Well, what query plans are used for the queries issued by \d on each
> of your two boxes? Have you done ANALYZE or VACUUM ANALYZE lately?
> (Out-of-date stats about the system tables might lead the planner to
> make a stupid choice of query plan.)
We find that sometimes pgadmin takes this long to show us DB details when we
double click on a DB and we vacuum analyse every night.
This ispostgres 7.2.1
Sam
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | jeff | 2002-08-05 08:07:51 | Installing postgresql |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2002-08-05 07:44:20 | Re: index and sequence name length limit? |