From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
To: mark durrant <markd89@yahoo.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 14:18:36 +0800
Message-ID: <4292C73C.60006@familyhealth.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050524054715.3988.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050524054715.3988.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com>
> select count(*) from mtable where day='Mon'
>
> Results:
>
> 1. P3 600 512MB RAM MSSQL. It takes about 4-5 secs to
> run. If I run a few queries and everything is cached,
> it is sometimes just 1 second.
>
> 2. Athlon 1.3 Ghz 1GB RAM. PostgreSQL takes 7 seconds.
> I have played with the buffers setting and currently
> have it at 7500. At 20000 it took over 20 seconds to
> run.
>
> 5 seconds vs 7 isn't that big of a deal, but 1 second
> vs 7 seconds is. Also, the slower performance is with
> much lesser hardware.
Post the result of this for us:
explain analyze select count(*) from mtable where day='Mon';
On both machines.
Chris
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: chriskl@familyhealth.com.au, markd89@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
In-Reply-To: <4292C73C.60006@familyhealth.com.au>
* 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