From: | Jean-Luc Lachance <jllachan(at)nsd(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] I feel the need for speed. What am I doing |
Date: | 2003-01-07 22:42:45 |
Message-ID: | 3E1B57E5.A5B673B3@nsd.ca |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
There is a construct that most people forget for that kind of query:
select "RT_REC_KEY", "cnxarraycolumn", "CRC" from a
except
select "RT_REC_KEY", "cnxarraycolumn", "CRC" from b;
simple.
JLL
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com> writes:
> > Yikes! Five times slower! But then I took Tom's incredibly helpful
> > suggestion to disable the sequential scan:
>
> Ideally, you shouldn't have to do that. Now that you have the correct
> indexes in place, could you show us the EXPLAIN ANALYZE output for both
> cases (enable_seqscan = on and off)?
>
> Also, you might try leaving enable_seqscan = on, and seeing how far you
> have to decrease random_page_cost to get the planner to choose
> indexscan.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Achilleus Mantzios | 2003-01-07 22:51:35 | Re: [SQL] [PERFORM] 7.3.1 index use / performance |
Previous Message | Achilleus Mantzios | 2003-01-07 22:38:17 | Re: [SQL] [PERFORM] 7.3.1 index use / performance |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vince Vielhaber | 2003-01-07 22:46:49 | Re: PostgreSQL site, put up or shut up? |
Previous Message | mlw | 2003-01-07 22:33:18 | Re: PostgreSQL and memory usage |