From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Feite Brekeveld <feite(dot)brekeveld(at)osiris-it(dot)nl> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: slow update but have an index |
Date: | 2001-08-17 10:12:55 |
Message-ID: | 20010817201255.B20613@svana.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 01:08:29PM +0200, Feite Brekeveld wrote:
> Now this table has about 80,000 records. I need to update 74,000 status
> fields. So I made a dump, and hacked the dump into SQL statements like:
>
> update accounting set status = 'C' where seqno = 1566385;
> ....
> and the other 74,000
>
> This is awfully slow. How come ? The index on the seqno should give
> speedy access to the record.
Well, an index speeds it up, but that times 80,000 will still take a while.
Is there any trickery or will this work?
update accounting set status = 'C';
If so, that will be much faster.
One sequential scan is faster than 80,000 index scans.
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
http://svana.org/kleptog/
> It would be nice if someone came up with a certification system that
> actually separated those who can barely regurgitate what they crammed over
> the last few weeks from those who command secret ninja networking powers.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Ansley (UK) | 2001-08-17 10:37:33 | RE: Roll Back dont roll back counters |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2001-08-17 09:47:31 | Re: Query Approach and performance |