| From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "biuro(at)globeinphotos(dot)com" <biuro(at)globeinphotos(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Why my cursor construction is so slow? |
| Date: | 2006-07-07 11:17:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20060707111720.GC7485@svana.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 11:30:35AM +0000, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> > With the LIMIT it might take a different approach, which
> > might be worse if you read the whole lot, but better for a limited set.
> > A fast-start plan so to speak.
>
> That looks like a better approach for a cursor.
For a cursor postgres assumes you're going to ask for about 10% of the
result, so it does aim for a reasonably fast-start plan. It probably
depends on the specifics of the situation how well it works...
Have a nice day,
--
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.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tino Wildenhain | 2006-07-07 11:18:10 | Re: Long term database archival |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-07-07 10:37:49 | Re: WAL internals |