| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | André Volpato <andre(dot)volpato(at)ecomtecnologia(dot)com(dot)br> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres not using array |
| Date: | 2008-08-21 19:10:18 |
| Message-ID: | 29595.1219345818@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Volpato?= <andre(dot)volpato(at)ecomtecnologia(dot)com(dot)br> writes:
> Tom Lane escreveu:
>> So I guess the question is "what is the bds_internacoes function, and
>> why is it so slow?"
> This function is quite fast:
Well, "fast" is relative. It's not fast enough, or you wouldn't have
been complaining.
> We are guessing that a dual core 3.0GHz will beat up a quad core 2.2,
> at least in this environmnent with less than 4 concurrent queryes.
The most you could hope for from that is less than a 50% speedup. I'd
suggest investing some tuning effort first. Some rethinking of your
schema, for example, might buy you orders of magnitude ... with no new
hardware investment.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Mayer | 2008-08-21 19:14:47 | Re: How to setup disk spindles for best performance |
| Previous Message | Dan Harris | 2008-08-21 17:53:51 | The state of PG replication in 2008/Q2? |