Re: Optimization recommendations request

From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
To: Joe Conway <joe(at)conway-family(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-SQL <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Optimization recommendations request
Date: 2000-12-29 23:12:48
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.21.0012291512120.19996-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql


What does explain show for your query?

On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Joe Conway wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I'm working on an application where I need to design for one table to grow
> to an extremely large size. I'm already planning to partition the data into
> multiple tables, and even possibly multiple servers, but even so each table
> may need to grow to the 10 - 15 million tuple range. This table will be used
> for a keyed lookup and it is very important that the query return in well
> under a second. I've done a small test using a dual ppro 200 server with 512
> MB RAM, running RedHat Linux 6.1, and a late November 7.1 pre-beta snapshot
> of PostgreSQL (PGOPTS="-D/opt/pgsql/data -i -B 25000"). I used a test table
> with about 5 million tuples.
>
> Details:
>
> CREATE TABLE foo(
> guid varchar(20) not null,
> ks varchar(20) not null
> );
>
> --> insert 5,000,000 rows, both guid and ks are 20 byte sha-1 hashes
> -- tried this first
> -- create index foo_idx1 on foo(guid);
> -- then tried
> create index foo_idx1 on foo using HASH (guid);
>
> SELECT ks FROM foo WHERE guid = 'f9ee1930f4010ba34cc5ca6efd27d988eb4f921d';
>
> The query currently takes in excess of 40 seconds. I would appreciate any
> suggestions for optimizing to bring this down substantially.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joe Conway 2000-12-29 23:39:35 Re: Optimization recommendations request
Previous Message Ron Peterson 2000-12-29 19:56:00 system catalog info