| From: | Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomi N/A <hefest(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, harding(dot)ian(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Speed of postgres compared to ms sql, is this |
| Date: | 2006-12-05 22:38:27 |
| Message-ID: | 1165358307.14565.464.camel@state.g2switchworks.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 16:32, Tomi N/A wrote:
> One type of query does come to mind, now that I think about it.
> pgsql has trouble handling queries like
> SELECT * FROM t0 WHERE t0.id_t1 IN (SELECT t1.id FROM t1 WHERE...)
> When the subselect returns a lot of results, pgsql really takes it's time.
Just wondering what version of pgsql you were using, as the in()
performance has been greatly improved in the newer versions.
What I noticed was that PostgreSQL was better under parallel load than
MSSQL server was. Our pgsql 7.2 server would routinely outrun the MSSQL
server (This was like 3 years ago) when they were both moderately
loaded. Of course, we didn't run a lot of where in () queries on the
pgsql server, we re-worked them to favor postgresql's query planner of
the time.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Manuel Fernández Campos | 2006-12-05 22:43:08 | Error with the odbc driver and the large objects |
| Previous Message | Ragnar | 2006-12-05 22:35:10 | Re: Anything I can do to speed up this query? |