From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
---|---|
To: | Relaxin <me(at)yourhouse(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS |
Date: | 2003-09-04 11:01:53 |
Message-ID: | 1062673303.5200.135.camel@fuji.krosing.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Relaxin kirjutas N, 04.09.2003 kell 03:28:
> I have a table with 102,384 records in it, each record is 934 bytes.
I created a test database on my Linux (RH9) laptop with 30GB/4200RPM ide
drive and P3-1133Mhz, 768MB, populated it with 128000 rows of 930 bytes
each and did
[hannu(at)fuji hannu]$ time psql test100k -c 'select * from test' >
/dev/null
real 0m3.970s
user 0m0.980s
sys 0m0.570s
so it seems definitely not a problem with postgres as such, but perhaps
with Cygwin and/or ODBC driver
I also ran the same query using the "standard" pg adapter:
>>> import pg, time
>>>
>>> con = pg.connect('test100k')
>>>
>>> def getall():
... t1 = time.time()
... res = con.query('select * from test')
... t2 = time.time()
... list = res.getresult()
... t3 = time.time()
... print t2 - t1, t3-t2
...
>>> getall()
3.27637195587 1.10105705261
>>> getall()
3.07413101196 0.996125936508
>>> getall()
3.03377199173 1.07322502136
which gave similar results
------------------------------
Hannu
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-04 13:48:48 | Re: PostgreSQL Reliability when fsync = false on Linux-XFS |
Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2003-09-04 10:40:54 | Re: Query on Postgresql performance |