From: Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
To: mark durrant <markd89@yahoo.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 16:47:31 +1000
Message-ID: <4292CE03.1070605@samurai.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050524064034.18213.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050524064034.18213.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com>
mark durrant wrote:
> PostgreSQL Machine:
> "Aggregate (cost=140122.56..140122.56 rows=1 width=0)
> (actual time=24516.000..24516.000 rows=1 loops=1)"
> " -> Index Scan using "day" on mtable
> (cost=0.00..140035.06 rows=35000 width=0) (actual
> time=47.000..21841.000 rows=1166025 loops=1)"
> " Index Cond: ("day" = 'Mon'::bpchar)"
> "Total runtime: 24516.000 ms"
Have you run ANALYZE?
Clustering the table on the "day" index (via the CLUSTER command) would
be worth trying.
-Neil
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: neilc@samurai.com, markd89@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
In-Reply-To: <4292CE03.1070605@samurai.com>
* 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