| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: index-only scans |
| Date: | 2011-08-16 00:51:56 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZv_qoHZ4Fhmip429X_gfPuvBf0GC6xw=H1x3z+6DvNkg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> That's 5.4X as fast; not too shabby!
Awesome!
> And with the large difference in response time, things appear to be working
> as hoped even in this situation. If you try this on your laptop, where
> drive cache size and random I/O are likely to be even slower, you might see
> an ever larger difference.
Hah! Just in case a 5.4X performance improvement isn't good enough? :-)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-08-16 01:01:04 | VACUUM FULL versus relcache init files |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2011-08-15 23:37:17 | Re: index-only scans |