X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D62B5529FA for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:12:01 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94696-06 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 19:11:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.192]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E589529F9 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:11:50 -0300 (ADT) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i2so1268136wra for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:11:52 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ExHRsy09rEcA4teGs23Jxob88YFIHdpzrWHDDtcQSwZlsCWRWruUQhfIDpZjSS08GUidVM9T7K/Zr3TtN/RttCfmT78kQBne/33tGcwJ7ls5X3EGR1YXTIphAcGg661oEGzp7vVk35aeXvWDcYdwngPx4RRun8n/X3QrPol/Aws= Received: by 10.54.57.79 with SMTP id f79mr857445wra; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:11:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.150.2 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:11:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1efd553a05071912111f6a3121@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:11:15 -0400 From: Oliver Crosby Reply-To: Oliver Crosby To: Tom Lane Subject: Re: Looking for tips Cc: "Joshua D. Drake" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <8446.1121799660@sss.pgh.pa.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <1efd553a05071910427b290203@mail.gmail.com> <42DD3D55.9020508@commandprompt.com> <1efd553a050719112126b8d981@mail.gmail.com> <8446.1121799660@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.083 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, RCVD_BY_IP X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200507/313 X-Sequence-Number: 13554 > If you're running only a single query at a time (no multiple clients), > then this is pretty much the definition of a MySQL-friendly workload; > I'd have to say we are doing really well if we are only 50% slower. > Postgres doesn't have any performance advantages until you get into > complex queries or a significant amount of concurrency. The original port was actually twice as slow. It improved quite a bit after I added transactions and trimmed the schema a bit. > You could possibly get some improvement if you can re-use prepared plans > for the queries; but this will require some fooling with the client code > (I'm not sure if DBD::Pg even has support for it at all). Aye. We have prepared statements.