From: Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>
To: Stefan Keller <sfkeller@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: KVP table vs. hstore - hstore performance (Was: Postgres NoSQL emulation)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 08:25:23 +0800
Message-ID: <4DD06EF3.7030003@postnewspapers.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=LjFTnn8hLwBZc1c87Vq+pw02+jQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=LjFTnn8hLwBZc1c87Vq+pw02+jQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 14/05/11 18:10, Stefan Keller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am conducting a benchmark to compare KVP table vs. hstore and got
> bad hstore performance results when the no. of records is greater than
> about 500'000.
>
> CREATE TABLE kvp ( id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY, key text NOT NULL, value text );
> -- with index on key
> CREATE TABLE myhstore ( id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY, obj hstore NOT NULL );
> -- with GIST index on obj
>
> Does anyone have experience with that?
What are your queries?
What does EXPLAIN ANALYZE report on those queries?
Did you ANALYZE your tables after populating them?
--
Craig Ringer
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: craig@postnewspapers.com.au, sfkeller@gmail.com
Subject: Re: KVP table vs. hstore - hstore performance (Was: Postgres NoSQL emulation)
In-Reply-To: <4DD06EF3.7030003@postnewspapers.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