From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tim Perdue <tperdue(at)valinux(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: 7.0.2 issues / Geocrawler |
Date: | 2000-07-12 16:06:36 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.21.0007121305580.1325-100000@thelab.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 12 Jul 2000, Mike Mascari wrote:
> Tim Perdue wrote:
> >
> > This is a *big* help.
> >
> > Yes, the table is approx 10-12GB in size and running your length() and
> > update queries is going to take a lifetime, since it will require a
> > calculation on 4 million rows.
> >
> > This doesn't address the serious performance problem I'm finding in
> > 7.0.2 for a multi-key select/order by/limit/offset query, which I sent
> > in a separate email.
> >
> > Tim
>
> If I recall correctly, Marc experienced similar performance
> differences with UDM search after upgrading. The optimizer was
> redesigned to be smarter about using indexes with both order by
> and limit. Tom Lane, of course, knows all there is to know on
> this. All I can ask is standard issue precursor to optimizer
> questions:
it was a problem with v7.0 that Tom provided a work around for, but I'm
99% certain that the work around was included in v7.0.1 ...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2000-07-12 16:07:10 | Re: 7.0.2 issues / Geocrawler |
Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB | 2000-07-12 15:49:53 | AW: 7.0.2 issues / Geocrawler |