Re: Using "LIMIT" is much faster even though, searching

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: "Hyun-Sung, Jang" <siche(at)siche(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Using "LIMIT" is much faster even though, searching
Date: 2004-12-01 05:03:51
Message-ID: 200411302103.51643.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Hyun-Sang,

> before test, I already executed VACUUM FULL.
> this result show up after vacuum full.

Really? Your results really look like a bloated table. Can you run VACUUM
FULL ANALYZE VERBOSE on the table and post the output?

> When I using index scan, the result was almost same, that means, there
> was no time difference, so i'll not mention about index scan.

Can we see an index scan plan anyway? EXPLAIN ANALYZE?

Oh, and if this is a zip codes table, why are you using a sequence as the
primary key instead of just using the zip code?

--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hyun-Sung, Jang 2004-12-01 06:03:31 Re: Using "LIMIT" is much faster even though, searching
Previous Message Hyun-Sung, Jang 2004-12-01 04:38:40 Re: Using "LIMIT" is much faster even though, searching