Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal

From: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
To: Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
Cc: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal
Date: 2006-05-11 08:30:25
Message-ID: 20060511083025.GE30113@svana.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 09:55:15AM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD wrote:
> > 0.101 ms BEGIN
> > 1.451 ms CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE tmp ( a INTEGER NOT NULL, b INTEGER
> NOT
> > NULL, c TIMESTAMP NOT NULL, d INTEGER NOT NULL ) ON COMMIT DROP
>
> 1.4 seconds is not great for create table, is that what we expect ?

Hmm, I'm hoping ms means milliseconds...
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zdenek Kotala 2006-05-11 11:59:46 Re: Bug in signal handler [Was: [TODO] Allow commenting
Previous Message Volkan YAZICI 2006-05-11 08:25:30 Re: intarray internals

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ketema Harris 2006-05-11 12:57:48 Nested Loops vs. Hash Joins or Merge Joins
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD 2006-05-11 07:55:15 Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal