| From: | John Arbash Meinel <john(at)arbash-meinel(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joel Fradkin <jfradkin(at)wazagua(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'PostgreSQL Perform'" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Any way to speed this up? |
| Date: | 2005-04-07 17:22:37 |
| Message-ID: | 42556C5D.6060106@arbash-meinel.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Joel Fradkin wrote:
>Here is the result after putting it back to 4 the original value (I had done
>that prior to your suggestion of using 2 or 3) to see what might change.
>I also vacummed and thought I saw records deleted in associate, which I
>found odd as this is a test site and no new records were added or deleted.
>
>
Well, that looks 2x as fast, right?
You might try
SET enable_mergejoin TO off;
Just to see if you can force a hash-join and see how long that takes.
You might also try increasing work_mem.
You can do that just in the current session with
SET work_mem TO ....;
John
=:->
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mischa | 2005-04-07 21:26:38 | Re: Recognizing range constraints (was Re: Plan for relatively simple query seems to be very inefficient) |
| Previous Message | Joel Fradkin | 2005-04-07 17:14:33 | Re: Any way to speed this up? |