Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Select performance vs. mssql

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: mark durrant <markd89(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
Date: 2005-05-24 06:47:31
Message-ID: 4292CE03.1070605@samurai.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
mark durrant wrote:
> PostgreSQL Machine:
> "Aggregate  (cost=140122.56..140122.56 rows=1 width=0)
> (actual time=24516.000..24516.000 rows=1 loops=1)"
> "  ->  Index Scan using "day" on mtable 
> (cost=0.00..140035.06 rows=35000 width=0) (actual
> time=47.000..21841.000 rows=1166025 loops=1)"
> "        Index Cond: ("day" = 'Mon'::bpchar)"
> "Total runtime: 24516.000 ms"

Have you run ANALYZE?

Clustering the table on the "day" index (via the CLUSTER command) would 
be worth trying.

-Neil

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Harald Lau (Sector-X)Date: 2005-05-24 08:49:05
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
Previous:From: mark durrantDate: 2005-05-24 06:40:34
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group