From: | Jeff Trout <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Jay Greenfield <jag(at)timberline(dot)ca> |
Cc: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'Stephen Frost'" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Postgres slower than MS ACCESS |
Date: | 2006-02-15 14:23:03 |
Message-ID: | 24B89C42-C597-4571-8BD1-A89073C3C035@torgo.978.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Feb 14, 2006, at 3:56 PM, Jay Greenfield wrote:
>> How do you get 4,000+ lines of explain analyze for one update
>> query in a
>> database with only one table? Something a bit fishy there.
>> Perhaps you
>> mean explain verbose, though I don't really see how that'd be so long
>> either, but it'd be closer. Could you provide some more sane
>> information?
>
> My mistake - there was 4,000 lines in the EXPLAIN ANALYZE VERBOSE
> output.
> Here is the output of EXPLAIN ANALYZE:
>
> QUERY PLAN
> "Seq Scan on ntdn (cost=0.00..3471884.39 rows=1221391 width=1592)
> (actual
> time=57292.580..1531300.003 rows=1221391 loops=1)"
> "Total runtime: 4472646.988 ms"
>
Have you been vacuuming or running autovacuum?
If you keep running queries like this you're certianly going to have
a ton of dead tuples, which would def explain these times too.
--
Jeff Trout <jeff(at)jefftrout(dot)com>
http://www.jefftrout.com/
http://www.stuarthamm.net/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | FERREIRA, William (VALTECH) | 2006-02-15 14:25:41 | Re: copy and postgresql.conf |
Previous Message | Jignesh K. Shah | 2006-02-15 14:14:10 | Re: copy and postgresql.conf |