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

Re: GiST index performance

From: Matthew Wakeling <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>
To: dforum <dforums(at)vieonet(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: GiST index performance
Date: 2009-04-16 17:23:49
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.00.0904161822060.22330@aragorn.flymine.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, dforum wrote:
> there is other performance problem on this request.
>
> If you analyse query plan, you see that most of the time are lost during 
> sequencial scan, and you have 2 seq scan.

Nonsense. Sequential scans account for all of one or two seconds of 
processing in these queries, which are 14 seconds and 38 minutes 
respectively.

Matthew

-- 
 Doctor:  Are you okay? You appear to be injured.
 Neelix:  Aaaaaaah!
 Doctor:  It's okay, it looks superficial.
 Neelix:  Am I going to die?
 Doctor:  Not unless you are allergic to tomatoes. This appears to be a sauce
          some kind.

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-04-16 17:52:35
Subject: Re: GiST index performance
Previous:From: dforumDate: 2009-04-16 17:19:18
Subject: Re: GiST index performance

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