From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andre Schubert <andre@km3.de>
Cc: Achilleus Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Help on indexing timestamps
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 10:05:03 -0500
Message-ID: <264.1047049503@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030307134702.135fa254.andre@km3.de>
References: <20030307130223.5a58c132.andre@km3.de>
<Pine.LNX.4.44.0303071416120.22117-100000@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
<20030307134702.135fa254.andre@km3.de>
Andre Schubert <andre@km3.de> writes:
> Yes if i use BETWEEN and type in the dates by hand the query takes about 200ms with explain analyze.
> I think these is a good performance.
> But if i use now() instead of manually typed dates the query take about 1400ms :(
> I thought the somebody posted to this list, that now() is a function that is not cached,
> and thatswhy does not work pretty well with indexes.
Update to 7.3, and that problem will go away.
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andre@km3.de, achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com
Subject: Re: Help on indexing timestamps
In-Reply-To: <264.1047049503@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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