X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [64.117.224.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E3DD1C50B for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:52:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([64.117.224.193]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [64.117.224.130]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 82831-01 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 17:51:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from joeconway.com (66-146-172-86.skyriver.net [66.146.172.86]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5ECED1C518 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 17:52:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [206.19.64.3] (account jconway HELO joeconway.com) by joeconway.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.6) with ESMTP-TLS id 19244; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 13:15:20 -0700 Message-ID: <3F2980DD.5010608@joeconway.com> Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 13:49:33 -0700 From: Joe Conway User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Cain Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: EXTERNAL storage and substring on long strings References: <1059679600.1429.41.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3F297CBA.1080703@joeconway.com> <1059684097.1429.62.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1059684097.1429.62.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200307/512 X-Sequence-Number: 2805 Scott Cain wrote: > So it is possible that if I had a fast scsi drive, the performance might > be better? Faster drives are always better ;-) Did you try the comparison with shorter substrings? Also, maybe not related to your specific question, but have you tuned any other postgresql.conf settings? Joe