Re: Query performance with small data base

From: pginfo <pginfo(at)t1(dot)unisoftbg(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Query performance with small data base
Date: 2002-10-18 12:51:25
Message-ID: 3DB003CD.B725B8CD@t1.unisoftbg.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Hi Tom,

I hope !
I changed it to 64 MB .

At the momenth I have results with 215 000 records.
The times is 28 sec ( for 66 000 it was ~ 8.5 sec.).

What is the normal perfornace for pg ?

And can you send me exampel conf file for better performance ?

regards,
Ivan.

Tom Lane wrote:

> pginfo <pginfo(at)t1(dot)unisoftbg(dot)com> writes:
> > I think that the problem is in sorting.
>
> Not according to the EXPLAIN results ... but did you change sort_mem?
> The default value is kinda small.
>
> regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message G.Nagarajan 2002-10-18 13:35:40 Re: Performance problem iterating a resultset
Previous Message Paul 2002-10-18 11:44:31 select into without creating new table