From: | "Webb Sprague" <webb(dot)sprague(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Reuven M(dot) Lerner" <reuven(at)lerner(dot)co(dot)il> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Database slowness -- my design, hardware, or both? |
Date: | 2007-03-06 05:34:59 |
Message-ID: | b11ea23c0703052134p12f12ce5u55768d7c6e58dc4d@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Well, I've tried to do massive UPDATEs as much as possible. But the
> patterns that we're looking for are basically of the variety, "If the user
> clicks on X and then clicks on Y, but without Z between the two of them, and
> if these are all part of the same simulation run, then we tag action X as
> being of interest to us." So it's oodles of keeping track of back-and-forth
> for each of the rows in the table, and looking forward and backward in the
> table.
>
> I agree that row-at-a-time thinking isn't the best way to work, but I
> didn't see a good alternative for our purposes. I'm open to any and all
> suggestions.
Can you post at least some table schemas, indexes, queries, and
explain output? I think of database optimization as a serious case of
devil in the details, and generalities (like -- make sure you index,
make sure your indexes help using explain, avoid row-at-a-time
thinking) won't get you far. So if we had something concrete to work
with, well, we would have something concrete to work with.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2007-03-06 06:04:39 | Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: postgresql vs mysql) |
Previous Message | Reuven M. Lerner | 2007-03-06 05:22:12 | Re: Database slowness -- my design, hardware, or both? |