From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: andremachado <andremachado@techforce.com.br>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Firebird 1.5.3 X Postgresql 8.1.3 (linux Firebird 1.5.3 X Postgresql 8.1.3 (linux and and windows)]
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:13:26 -0400
Message-ID: <11869.1146154406@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060427122235.M42721@techforce.com.br>
References: <20060427122235.M42721@techforce.com.br>
"andremachado" <andremachado@techforce.com.br> writes:
> Firebird has something similiar to EXPLAIN. Please look below.
Hm, maybe I just don't know how to read their output, but it's not
obvious to me where they are doing the min/max aggregates.
> Is there something really wrong with the postgresql configuration (at my
> previous msg) that is causing this poor performance at these 2 queries?
I don't think it's a configuration issue, it's a quality-of-plan issue.
Could you put together a self-contained test case for this problem? I
don't have the time or interest to try to reverse-engineer tables and
test data for these queries --- but I would be interested in finding out
where the time is going, if I could run the queries.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andremachado@techforce.com.br
Subject: Re: Firebird 1.5.3 X Postgresql 8.1.3 (linux Firebird 1.5.3 X Postgresql 8.1.3 (linux and and windows)]
In-Reply-To: <11869.1146154406@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox