X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E42B8B9B37 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2005 16:51:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 91455-01 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2005 16:51:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 414F48B9B83 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2005 16:51:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from jfradkin ([66.15.127.235]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.06 201-253-122-130-106-20030910) with ESMTP id <20050201165120.FDOS17674.out004.verizon.net@jfradkin> for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:51:20 -0600 From: "Joel Fradkin" To: Subject: MSSQL versus Postgres timing Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 11:54:11 -0500 Message-ID: <000001c5087e$b92ddfa0$797ba8c0@jfradkin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C50854.D057D7A0" X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out004.verizon.net from [66.15.127.235] at Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:51:20 -0600 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.097 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, HTML_MESSAGE, MSGID_DOLLARS X-Spam-Level: *** X-Archive-Number: 200502/24 X-Sequence-Number: 20135 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C50854.D057D7A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable All is moving along well. I have all my views and data and am testing things out a bit. A table with 645,000 records for associates has view (basically select * from tblassociates where clientnum =3D 'test') This is taking 13 seconds in postgres and 3 seconds in MSSQL. =20 I tried making an index on clientnum (there is one on clinetnum, = associateID in MSSQL). I did an analyze. I did a set seq scan off =20 Is there a possibility postgres is this much slower, or (my hope) I am missing some key concept. Be glad to provide the view and tables etc. =20 Joel Fradkin =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C50854.D057D7A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All is moving along well.

I have all my views and data and am testing things = out a bit.

A table with 645,000 records for associates has view = (basically select * from tblassociates where clientnum =3D = ‘test’)

This is taking 13 seconds in postgres and 3 seconds = in MSSQL.

 

I tried making an index on clientnum (there is one on = clinetnum, associateID in MSSQL).

I did an analyze.

I did a set seq scan off

 

Is there a possibility postgres is this much slower, = or (my hope) I am missing some key concept.

Be glad to provide the view and tables = etc.

 

Joel Fradkin

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C50854.D057D7A0--