From: | "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Laszlo Nagy" <gandalf(at)designaproduct(dot)biz>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: tsearch2 question (was: Poor performance on seq |
Date: | 2006-09-12 18:36:10 |
Message-ID: | C12C4C2A.30B55%llonergan@greenplum.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Lazlo,
On 9/12/06 10:01 AM, "Laszlo Nagy" <gandalf(at)designaproduct(dot)biz> wrote:
> zeusd1=> explain analyze select id from product_search where name_desc
> like '%Mug%';
> QUERY PLAN
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------
> Seq Scan on product_search (cost=0.00..54693.34 rows=36487 width=8)
> (actual time=20.036..2541.971 rows=91399 loops=1)
> Filter: (name_desc ~~ '%Mug%'::text)
> Total runtime: 2581.272 ms
> (3 rows)
>
> The total runtime remains below 3 sec in all cases.
By creating a table with only the name field you are searching, you have
just reduced the size of rows so that they fit in memory. That is why your
query runs faster.
If your searched data doesn't grow, this is fine. If it does, you will need
to fix your disk drive OS problem.
- Luke
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Dutcher | 2006-09-12 19:05:35 | Re: [Fwd: Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared |
Previous Message | Piñeiro | 2006-09-12 18:28:28 | Re: [Fwd: Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared |