From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
To: mark durrant <markd89@yahoo.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 12:27:13 -0500
Message-ID: <20050524172713.GC8129@wolff.to> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050524153637.64525.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050524153637.64525.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com>
On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 08:36:36 -0700,
mark durrant <markd89@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --MSSQL's ability to hit the index only and not having
> to go to the table itself results in a _big_
> performance/efficiency gain. If someone who's in
> development wants to pass this along, it would be a
> nice addition to PostgreSQL sometime in the future.
> I'd suspect that as well as making one query faster,
> it would make everything else faster/more scalable as
> the server load is so much less.
This gets brought up a lot. The problem is that the index doesn't include
information about whether the current transaction can see the referenced
row. Putting this information in the index will add significant overhead
to every update and the opinion of the developers is that this would be
a net loss overall.
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: bruno@wolff.to, markd89@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
In-Reply-To: <20050524172713.GC8129@wolff.to>
* 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