Re: Slow response from 'SELECT * FROM table'

I am curious, what performance difference does it make to use vanilla
SELECT with to use cursor (for retrieving the entire records)?

Thanks

Wei

At 11:13 AM 11/11/2002 +0100, Jakub Ouhrabka wrote:
>hi,
>
>do you really need all 500k records? if not i'd suggest using limit and
>offset clause (select * from table order by xy limit 100 - xy should be
>indexed...) or if you really need all records use a cursor.
>
>kuba
>
>On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Jirka Novak wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have table with 30 columns and 30000..500000 rows. When I make
> > 'SELECT * FROM table' postgresql start doing something and return first
> > row after 10s (for 30k rows) and after 5min (500k rows). It looks like
> > it copy whole response to temp space and after that it shows it.
> > I don't know why. I tested same table structure and datas on Oracle
> > and MSSQL and both returned first row immediatly.
> > Have someone any idea?
> >
> > Jirka Novak
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
> >
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
>message can get through to the mailing list cleanly