From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andy Halsall <halsall_andy(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "postgresql (dot)org novice list" <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Function Scan costs |
Date: | 2012-06-27 17:54:58 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMK6HYz28WfN_Da7uokJ_Lmg46Ngtak63Ai-1W6F7ZAsTA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-novice |
On 27 June 2012 16:56, Andy Halsall <halsall_andy(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
> LOG: duration: 0.497 ms plan:
> Query Text: select * from sp_select_by_node_rel($1,$2)
> Function Scan on public.sp_select_by_node_rel (cost=0.25..0.26
> rows=1 width=296) (actual time=0.482..0.483 rows=1 loo
> ps=1)
> Output: tn_type, rel_type, tn_c_state, tn_sort, tn_d_state,
> tn_create_order, stn_guid, tsn_guid, tn_gen_perms, tn_au
> dit, rel_state, sp_perms, rel_control, prime_key, prime_key_len, sec_key,
> sec_key_len, u_prime_key, u_prime_key_len, u_sec_key
> , u_sec_key_len
>
> Function Call: sp_select_by_node_rel(82677::bigint, 71346::bigint)
> Buffers: shared hit=6
Seems OK to me.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Antonio Carlos Salzvedel Furtado Junior | 2012-06-27 20:28:48 | The use of cpu_index_tuple_cost by the query planner |
Previous Message | Andy Halsall | 2012-06-27 15:56:01 | Function Scan costs |