From: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
To: Dimi Paun <dimi@lattica.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Bad performance on simple query
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:16:32 -0700
Message-ID: <dcc563d10811170916n622e4f86g8f2b2dbe9b9e2a61@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1226941621.5760.97.camel@dimi.lattica.com>
References: <1226937197.5760.89.camel@dimi.lattica.com>
<dcc563d10811170853y75b1286fy503d82222b49bf15@mail.gmail.com>
<1226941621.5760.97.camel@dimi.lattica.com>
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Dimi Paun <dimi@lattica.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 09:53 -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>>
>> Are you saying it's excessive you need the compound query? Cause
>> that's running in 91microseconds as pointed out by Alan.
>
> Of course, my bad. I read that as 91ms (<blush/>).
>
> Confusion came from the fact that pgadminIII reports the query
> taking 20-40ms, so I read the 0.091 as seconds not ms.
Ahhh. Keep in mind that if you just run the query, pgadminIII will
tell you how long it took to run AND return all the data across the
network, so it will definitely take longer then. But most of that's
network io wait so it's not a real issue unless you're saturating your
network.
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: scott.marlowe@gmail.com, dimi@lattica.com
Subject: Re: Bad performance on simple query
In-Reply-To: <dcc563d10811170916n622e4f86g8f2b2dbe9b9e2a61@mail.gmail.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