From: | "Joel Fradkin" <jfradkin(at)wazagua(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "'Michael Fuhr'" <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
Cc: | <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: MSSQL versus Postgres timing |
Date: | 2005-02-01 19:26:07 |
Message-ID: | 000101c50893$e25da5d0$797ba8c0@jfradkin |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
With seq scan on.
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Fuhr [mailto:mike(at)fuhr(dot)org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 12:07 PM
To: Joel Fradkin
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [SQL] MSSQL versus Postgres timing
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:54:11AM -0500, Joel Fradkin wrote:
>
> A table with 645,000 records for associates has view (basically select *
> from tblassociates where clientnum = 'test')
>
> This is taking 13 seconds in postgres and 3 seconds in MSSQL.
Please post the EXPLAIN ANALYZE output for the slow query, once
with enable_seqscan on and once with it off. For example:
SET enable_seqscan TO on; -- if not already on
EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT * FROM tblassociates WHERE clientnum = 'test';
SET enable_seqscan TO off;
EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT * FROM tblassociates WHERE clientnum = 'test';
> Be glad to provide the view and tables etc.
Please do -- it might help us spot something that could be improved.
What version of PostgreSQL are you using?
--
Michael Fuhr
http://www.fuhr.org/~mfuhr/
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
explainanalyzeviwassoclist.txt | text/plain | 1.6 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joel Fradkin | 2005-02-01 20:19:19 | Re: MSSQL versus Postgres timing |
Previous Message | Joel Fradkin | 2005-02-01 19:23:15 | Re: MSSQL versus Postgres timing |