Received: from localhost (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 285FF9FB7CB for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:38:50 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 83317-01 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:38:41 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com (wx-out-0506.google.com [66.249.82.236]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BAAE9FB434 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:38:40 -0300 (ADT) Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s16so606171wxc for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:38:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=JoC0L8BzCdNJtspVSWvfRMVjg4Mm0tbtXxZNJzXxpHXN+38JUsFMV78Kyq8xNDCRFItp9ZbiwOBYlqmCU9JPsF5TXO4vSfElarP+vXk1z5otyXZr59YKnKvLBWMxb2bjs/Z+AZ5TFGnpzwLrE2mgYfD+Qshol9b83GC/u18EeBk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=cE3NUmdacuBMa5aq9hwvy8r+nycfS5qkPNVaF16DsY8VgXKv0B2wt6dP9YXxxv31HTkcVutRfQEhf0ohb6aSrOpSiFEDHn7QiXBEnTsBbXgeaCCptbLmSmwq20MiNRg7k7K0QJVJWUD8nkVPLTAwsNNQp2EwjF9yk2jNtKwkk0M= Received: by 10.70.59.9 with SMTP id h9mr3723964wxa.1182465520097; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:38:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.90.7 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:38:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5482c80a0706211538ka531c18gcf681cd5a68066b2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:38:40 +0200 From: Dimitri To: "Rainer Bauer" Subject: Re: Data transfer very slow when connected via DSL Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <16953.1182439969@sss.pgh.pa.us> <5482c80a0706211432g170154e7x4ee36e5148d272d5@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200706/497 X-Sequence-Number: 25530 Let's stay optimist - at least now you know the main source of your problem! :)) Let's see now with CURSOR... Firstly try this: munnin=>\timing munnin=>\set FETCH_COUNT 1; munnin=>select * from "tblItem"; what's the time you see here? (I think your application is working in this manner) Now, change the FETCH_COUNT to 10, then 50, then 100 - your query execution time should be better (at least I hope so :)) And if it's better - you simply need to modify your FETCH clause with adapted "FORWARD #" value (the best example is psql source code itself, you may find ExecQueryUsingCursor function implementation (file common.c))... Rgds, -Dimitri On 6/22/07, Rainer Bauer wrote: > Hello Dimitri, > > >but did you try to execute your query directly from 'psql' ?... > > munnin=>\timing > munnin=>select * from "tblItem"; > > (50 rows) > Time: 391,000 ms > > >Why I'm asking: seems to me your case is probably just network latency > >dependent, and what I noticed during last benchmarks with PostgreSQL > >the SELECT query become very traffic hungry if you are using CURSOR. > >Program 'psql' is implemented to not use CURSOR by default, so it'll > >be easy to check if you're meeting this issue or not just by executing > >your query remotely from 'psql'... > > Yes, see also my other post. > > Unfortunatelly this means that using my program to connect via DSL to the > Postgres database is not possible. > > Rainer > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org >