X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600B69FA2CB for ; Wed, 10 May 2006 18:18:55 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 26897-08 for ; Wed, 10 May 2006 18:18:45 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from h57078.serverkompetenz.net (talk-net.net [81.169.128.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEEEE9FA293 for ; Wed, 10 May 2006 18:18:44 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.115.250] (e178173057.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.178.173.57]) by h57078.serverkompetenz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A65950C73F; Wed, 10 May 2006 23:17:05 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <446258C2.2070805@network-inventory.de> Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 23:18:58 +0200 From: Thomas Vatter User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.5 (Windows/20050711) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Dutcher CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: in memory views References: <01fd01c67475$ef17d530$8300a8c0@tridecap.com> In-Reply-To: <01fd01c67475$ef17d530$8300a8c0@tridecap.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030203090904080403040502" X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200605/274 X-Sequence-Number: 19061 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030203090904080403040502 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dave Dutcher wrote: > Are you using the Postgres JDBC driver? Or are you using an ODBC JDBC > driver? The Postgres specific driver is usually faster. I'm using the postgres driver regards tom > > > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org] *On Behalf Of > *Thomas Vatter > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 10, 2006 3:54 PM > *To:* Scott Marlowe > *Cc:* Tino Wildenhain; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org > *Subject:* Re: [PERFORM] in memory views > > Scott Marlowe wrote: > >>On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 10:41, Thomas Vatter wrote: >> >> >>>Scott Marlowe wrote: >>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>What happens if you do this by declaring it as a cursor and then >>>>fetching the first row? >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>I do executeQuery(), for the resultSet I do next() and return one row, >>>but wait, I have to review the logic in this area, I can tell you >>>tomorrow >>> >>> >> >> >>A good short test is to run explain analyze on the query from the psql >>command line. If it shows an execution time of significantly less than >>what you get from you application, then it is likely that the real >>problem is that your application is receiving the whole result set via >>libpq and waiting for that. A cursor will solve that problem. >> >>---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >>TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? >> >> http://archives.postgresql.org >> >> >> >> > Yes, the difference between psql command line and application is 6 > seconds to 40 seconds. It is > exactly the step resultSet = excecuteQuery() that needs 40 > seconds. I use next() as a cursor > through the resultSet, but I fear this is not enough, do I have to > use createStatement(resultSetType, > resultSetConcurrency) respectively prepareStatement > (resultSetType, resultSetConcurrency) to > achieve the cursor behaviour? > > regards > tom > -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards Vatter Network Inventory Software Sun Microsystems Principal Partner www.network-inventory.de Tel. 030-79782510 E-Mail thomas.vatter@network-inventory.de --------------030203090904080403040502 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dave Dutcher wrote:
Message
Are you using the Postgres JDBC driver?  Or are you using an ODBC JDBC driver?  The Postgres specific driver is usually faster.

I'm using the postgres driver

regards
tom




 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Vatter
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 3:54 PM
To: Scott Marlowe
Cc: Tino Wildenhain; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] in memory views

Scott Marlowe wrote: 
On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 10:41, Thomas Vatter wrote:
  
Scott Marlowe wrote: 
    

  
What happens if you do this by declaring it as a cursor and then
fetching the first row?
      

  
  
      
I do executeQuery(), for the resultSet I do next() and return one row,
but wait, I have to review the logic in this area, I can tell you
tomorrow
    


A good short test is to run explain analyze on the query from the psql
command line.  If it shows an execution time of significantly less than
what you get from you application, then it is likely that the real
problem is that your application is receiving the whole result set via
libpq and waiting for that.  A cursor will solve that problem.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

               http://archives.postgresql.org
Yes, the difference between psql command line and application is 6 seconds to 40 seconds. It is
exactly the step resultSet = excecuteQuery() that needs 40 seconds. I use next() as a cursor
through the resultSet, but I fear this is not enough, do I have to use createStatement(resultSetType,
resultSetConcurrency) respectively prepareStatement (resultSetType, resultSetConcurrency) to
achieve the cursor behaviour?

regards
tom



-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards
Vatter
 
Network Inventory Software
Sun Microsystems Principal Partner

www.network-inventory.de
Tel. 030-79782510
E-Mail thomas.vatter@network-inventory.de
--------------030203090904080403040502--