From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Gary Cowell <gary_cowell(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Major differences between oracle and postgres performance - what can I do ? |
Date: | 2004-06-18 17:01:51 |
Message-ID: | 22514.1087578111@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> * Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
>> [... thinks for awhile ...] It seems possible that they may use sort
>> code that knows it is performing a DISTINCT operation and discards
>> duplicates on sight. Given that there are only 534 distinct values,
>> the sort would easily stay in memory if that were happening.
> Could this optimization be added to PostgreSQL? It sounds like a very
> reasonable thing to do.
That's what I was wondering about too. But first I'd like to get
some kind of reading on how effective it would be. If someone can
demonstrate that Oracle can do sort-and-drop-dups a lot faster than
it can do a straight sort of the same amount of input data, that
would be a strong indication that it's worth doing. At this point
we don't know if that's the source of their win or not.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2004-06-18 17:53:17 | Re: Major differences between oracle and postgres performance - what can I do ? |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2004-06-18 16:30:03 | Re: Major differences between oracle and postgres performance - what can I do ? |