| From: | Dimitri <dimitrik(dot)fr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. |
| Date: | 2009-05-19 10:24:58 |
| Message-ID: | 5482c80a0905190324r3173b90cxb1b4288821f8991a@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
No, Tom, the query cache was off.
I put it always explicitly off on MySQL as it has scalability issues.
Rgds,
-Dimitri
On 5/19/09, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> In particular, running the tests repeatedly using
>> H.REF_OBJECT = '0000000001'
>> rather than varying the value seems likely to benefit MySQL.
>
> ... mumble ... query cache?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri | 2009-05-19 10:46:45 | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-05-19 07:25:45 | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. |