Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BE4F64FE47
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:14:22 -0400 (AST)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 17616-07
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:14:19 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from ulysses.lattica.com (lattica.com [204.14.19.114])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEB6C64FD92
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:14:18 -0400 (AST)
Received: from localhost (ulysses.lattica.com [127.0.0.1])
	by ulysses.lattica.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1A0A7383DD;
	Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:14:15 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lattica.com
Received: from ulysses.lattica.com ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (ulysses.lattica.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id Z2MzXMRDNzPL; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:14:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [192.168.3.11]
	(CPE00010242152b-CM0011aec8bfb4.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com
	[99.253.168.241])
	by ulysses.lattica.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A161738073;
	Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:14:15 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Bad performance on simple query
From: Dimi Paun <dimi@lattica.com>
To: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <dcc563d10811170940l3a2673a9o19f253b5b10c4c38@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1226937197.5760.89.camel@dimi.lattica.com>
	<dcc563d10811170853y75b1286fy503d82222b49bf15@mail.gmail.com>
	<1226941621.5760.97.camel@dimi.lattica.com>
	<dcc563d10811170916n622e4f86g8f2b2dbe9b9e2a61@mail.gmail.com>
	<1226943062.5760.103.camel@dimi.lattica.com>
	<dcc563d10811170940l3a2673a9o19f253b5b10c4c38@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Lattica, Inc.
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:14:14 -0500
Message-Id: <1226945654.5760.106.camel@dimi.lattica.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.3 (2.12.3-5.fc8) 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200811/153
X-Sequence-Number: 31884


On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 10:40 -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> I'm guessing a fair bit of that time is pgadminIII prettifying the
> output for you, etc.  I.e. it's not all transfer time.  Hard to say
> without hooking some kind of profiler in pgadminIII.  Is psql running
> local and pgadminIII remotely?  Or are they both remote?  If both psql
> and pgadminIII are remote (i.e. same basic circumstances) then it's
> got to be a difference in the client causing the extra time.  OR is
> this output of explain analyze?

With \timing on I get basically the same output (local vs remote)
in psql (0.668ms vs. 0.760ms). More like it.


WTH is pgadminIII reporting?!?

-- 
Dimi Paun <dimi@lattica.com>
Lattica, Inc.