Re: [PERFORM] Interesting incosistent query timing

From: Ernest E Vogelsinger <ernest(at)vogelsinger(dot)at>
To: "Nikolaus Dilger" <nikolaus(at)dilger(dot)cc>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Interesting incosistent query timing
Date: 2003-06-17 02:54:56
Message-ID: 5.1.1.6.2.20030617044100.02dd1c70@mail.vogelsinger.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-performance

At 04:20 17.06.2003, Nikolaus Dilger said:
--------------------[snip]--------------------
>My guess is that the second execution of the query is
>shorter since the data blocks are cached in memory.
>When you modify the data then it needs to be read again
>from disk which is much slower than from memory. The
>short execution after restarting PostgreSQL seems to
>indicate that your data is cached in the Linux buffer
>cache.
>
>The only strange thing seems to be that you have so few
>rows. Are you getting the data from a remote machine?
>How many bytes does a single row have? Are they really
>large???
--------------------[snip]--------------------

What exactly do you mean? This table is quite filled (2.3 million rows),
but the query results are correct.

--
>O Ernest E. Vogelsinger
(\) ICQ #13394035
^ http://www.vogelsinger.at/

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-06-17 03:32:05 Re: order of nested loop
Previous Message Nikolaus Dilger 2003-06-17 02:20:57 Re: [PERFORM] Interesting incosistent query timing

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dawn Hollingsworth 2003-06-17 06:46:48 Re: Postgres Connections Requiring Large Amounts of Memory
Previous Message Nikolaus Dilger 2003-06-17 02:20:57 Re: [PERFORM] Interesting incosistent query timing