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 EFF733A5A71 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 04:20:07 +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 56097-03 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 04:20:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from illusions.com (unknown [69.28.129.146]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7328E3A5A5F for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 04:19:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: (qmail 26320 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2005 04:20:29 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (127.0.0.1) by illusions.com with SMTP; 26 Jan 2005 04:20:29 -0000 Message-ID: <41F71AB4.5030208@illusions.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 21:21:08 -0700 From: Dennis Sacks User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Fradkin Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: same question little different test MSSQL vrs Postgres References: <000901c5035a$3b619cc0$797ba8c0@jfradkin> In-Reply-To: <000901c5035a$3b619cc0$797ba8c0@jfradkin> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050706060502030005020509" X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.505 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TITLE_EMPTY X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200501/243 X-Sequence-Number: 20031 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050706060502030005020509 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Joel Fradkin wrote: > I also tried a simple select * from tblcase where clientum = 'SAKS' > > On both MSSQL and Postgres. > > MSSQL was 3 secs, Postgres was 27 secs. > > > > There is a key for clientnum, but it appeared on both systems > (identical Dell Desktops Postgres is running Linux MSSQL is XP) it did > not do a indexed search. > One of the things you'll want to do regularly is run a "vacuum analyze". You can read up on this in the postgresql docs. This is essential to the indexes being used properly. At a bare minimum, after you import a large amount of data, you'll want to run vacuum analyze. Dennis Sacks dennis@illusions.com --------------050706060502030005020509 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Joel Fradkin wrote:

I also tried a simple select * from tblcase where clientum = ‘SAKS’

On both MSSQL and Postgres.

MSSQL was 3 secs, Postgres was 27 secs.

 

There is a key for clientnum, but it appeared on both systems (identical Dell Desktops Postgres is running Linux MSSQL is XP) it did not do a indexed search.


One of the things you'll want to do regularly is run a "vacuum analyze". You can read up on this in the postgresql docs. This is essential to the indexes being used properly. At a bare minimum, after you import a large amount of data, you'll want to run vacuum analyze.

Dennis Sacks
dennis@illusions.com
--------------050706060502030005020509--