Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: scale up (postgresql vs mssql)

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Klemme <shortcutter(at)googlemail(dot)com>
Cc: Eyal Wilde <eyal(at)impactsoft(dot)co(dot)il>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: scale up (postgresql vs mssql)
Date: 2012-05-09 12:53:01
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:11 AM, Robert Klemme
<shortcutter(at)googlemail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> let's see the query plan...when you turned it off, did it go faster?
>> put your suspicious plans here:
> I suggest to post three plans:
> 1. insert into temp table
> 2. access to temp table before analyze
> 3. access to temp table after analyze
> Maybe getting rid of the temp table (e.g. using a view or even an
> inline view) is even better than optimizing temp table access.

yeah -- perhaps a CTE might work as well.


In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: MauMauDate: 2012-05-09 13:06:17
Subject: Could synchronous streaming replication really degrade the performance of the primary?
Previous:From: Robert KlemmeDate: 2012-05-09 07:11:42
Subject: Re: scale up (postgresql vs mssql)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group