| From: | David Teran <david(dot)teran(at)cluster9(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PgSQL Performance ML <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | select count(*) from anIntColumn where int_value = 0; is very slow |
| Date: | 2004-02-11 13:03:15 |
| Message-ID: | A79C4495-5C92-11D8-B407-000A95A6F0DC@cluster9.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi
we have a table with about 4 million rows. One column has an int value,
there is a btree index on it. We tried to execute the following
statement and it is very slow on a dual G5 2GHZ with 4 GB of RAM.
explain analyze select count(*) from job_property where int_value = 0;
Aggregate (cost=144348.80..144348.80 rows=1 width=0) (actual
time=13536.852..13536.852 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on job_property (cost=0.00..144255.15 rows=37459
width=0) (actual time=19.422..13511.653 rows=42115 loops=1)
Filter: (int_value = 0)
Total runtime: 13560.862 ms
Is this more or less normal or can we optimize this a little bit?
FrontBase (which we compare currently) takes 2 seconds first time and
about 0.2 seconds on second+ queries.
regards David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2004-02-11 13:11:13 | Re: select count(*) from anIntColumn where int_value = 0; |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-02-09 05:34:18 | Re: Why is query selecting sequential? |