Thanks for your valuable inputs !
The cost is "13.88" to fetch 1 row by scanning an Primary Key
>> indexed column.
>> Isn't the cost for fetching 1 row is too high ?
> Not really. The "cost" is really just an estimate to rank alternate query
> plans so the database picks the least expensive plan. The number '13.88' is
> basically meaningless. It doesn't translate to any real-world equivalent.
> What you actually care about is the execution time. If it takes 0.25ms or
> something per row, that's what really matters.
> For what it's worth, it looks like you have the right query plan, there.
> Scan the primary key for one row. What's wrong with that? Our systems have
> tables far larger than yours, handling 300M queries per day that are far
> more expensive than a simple primary key index scan. You'll be fine. :)
Execution time is 0.025 ms per row. I am quite happy with the execution
time, even the plan is going the correct way. The total execution time
reduced from 2.5 hrs to 5.5 seconds. I am looking for a room for further
improvement -- probably quite ambitious :-) ..
But, when i reduced random_page_cost to 2, the cost reduced to 7.03 and
execution also have reduced by almost 50%. Is this an gain ?
Please comment !
> See http://www.peak6.com/email_**disclaimer/<http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/>for terms and conditions related to this email
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Stefan Keller||Date: 2012-02-26 19:11:24|
|Subject: Re: PG as in-memory db? How to warm up and re-populate
buffers? How to read in all tuples into memory?|
|Previous:||From: Venkat Balaji||Date: 2012-02-26 17:14:51|
|Subject: Re: : Cost calculation for EXPLAIN output|