From: ON.KG <skyer@on.kg>
To: Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: What is faster?
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 21:02:13 +0400
Message-ID: <15836788703.20050606210213@on.kg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42A4616E.8070101@archonet.com>
References: <OF070A806E.9AC2F48A-ON65257018.003D07AB-65257018.003DF74B@flextronicssoftware.com>
<42A43791.7030306@archonet.com>
<17434586625.20050606202531@on.kg>
<42A4616E.8070101@archonet.com>
Hi All!
>> What is faster - SLECTion data from one large table (200 000 - 300 000
>> records), or SELECTion from a few small tables (example, 2 tables 150
>> 000 records each)?
RH> It depends. Are you selecting all records? One record? A few records? If
RH> one or a few, do you have a suitable index on the table(s)? Is the table
RH> clustered? Expected to be cached in RAM?
RH> Do you have a specific problem, or reason to believe you may encounter one?
It's a real problem
For example i have two large tables
Structure of tables is same - has two fields - id, ip
Now i'm using two selection from each in one transaction
Each of them selects only one record
selection clase like WHERE ip = 'xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx'
so it is searches existance of IP in each table
tables are clustered
about cached in RAM - i'm novice in Postgresql - how does it work?
now i need to make much faster as it is possible
and have an idea just merge two tables in one - will it help me?
Thank You
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: skyer@on.kg, dev@archonet.com
Subject: Re: What is faster?
In-Reply-To: <15836788703.20050606210213@on.kg>
* 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