Re: [SQL] OFFSET impact on Performance???

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: alex(at)neteconomist(dot)com
Cc: Andrei Bintintan <klodoma(at)ar-sd(dot)net>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [SQL] OFFSET impact on Performance???
Date: 2005-01-20 16:53:14
Message-ID: 41EFE1FA.60004@archonet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance pgsql-sql

Alex Turner wrote:
> I am also very interesting in this very question.. Is there any way
> to declare a persistant cursor that remains open between pg sessions?

Not sure how this would work. What do you do with multiple connections?
Only one can access the cursor, so which should it be?

> This would be better than a temp table because you would not have to
> do the initial select and insert into a fresh table and incur those
> IO costs, which are often very heavy, and the reason why one would
> want to use a cursor.

I'm pretty sure two things mean there's less difference than you might
expect:
1. Temp tables don't fsync
2. A cursor will spill to disk beyond a certain size

--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Holger Hoffstaette 2005-01-20 16:55:56 Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
Previous Message Randolf Richardson 2005-01-20 16:49:55 Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2005-01-20 16:59:34 Re: [SQL] OFFSET impact on Performance???
Previous Message Ron Mayer 2005-01-20 16:49:39 Re: [SQL] OFFSET impact on Performance???