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

Re: planner/optimizer question

From: Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>
To: Gary Doades <gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: planner/optimizer question
Date: 2004-04-30 05:26:59
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0404300723310.3157-100000@zigo.dhs.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Gary Doades wrote:

> I should have also pointed out that MSSQL reported that same index scan
> as taking 65% of the overall query time. It was just "faster". The
> overall query took 103ms in MSSQL.

Are your results based on a single client accessing the database and no 
concurrent updates?

Would adding more clients, and maybe having some client that
updates/inserts into the tables, still make mssql faster then pg? Maybe
it's so simple as pg being optimized for more concurrent users then mssql?

I'm just asking, I don't know much about the inner workings of 
mssql.

-- 
/Dennis Björklund


In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Achilleus MantziosDate: 2004-04-30 05:49:41
Subject: Re: Use arrays or not?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-04-30 04:30:26
Subject: Re: Insert only tables and vacuum performance

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