From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "shaiju(dot)ck" <shaiju(dot)ck(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Select * is very slow |
Date: | 2010-11-08 15:23:32 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=ar5kF2j8xjbur1zugQv2Sj6ZOVhamm5kr-7_Y@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hello
do you use a VACUUM statement?
Regards
Pavel Stehule
2010/11/8 shaiju.ck <shaiju(dot)ck(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> Hi, I have a table employee with 33 columns. The table have 200 records now.
> Select * from employee takes 15 seconds to fetch the data!!! Which seems to
> be very slow. But when I say select id,name from empoyee it executes in
> 30ms. Same pefromance if I say select count(*) from emloyee. Why the query
> is slow if I included all the columns in the table. As per my understanding
> , number of columns should not be having a major impact on the query
> performance. I have increased the shared_buffres to 1024MB, but no
> improvement. I have noticed that the query "show shared_buffers" always show
> 8MB.Why is this? Does it mean that changing the shared_buffers in config
> file have no impact? Can anybody help? Shaiju
> ________________________________
> View this message in context: Select * is very slow
> Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thom Brown | 2010-11-08 15:30:30 | Re: Select * is very slow |
Previous Message | Marti Raudsepp | 2010-11-08 14:23:27 | Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? |