From: | Sven Geisler <sgeisler(at)aeccom(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | nicky <nicky(at)valuecare(dot)nl> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. |
Date: | 2006-06-22 11:29:41 |
Message-ID: | 449A7F25.3040607@aeccom.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi Nicky,
Did you tried to create an index to avoid the sequential scans?
Seq Scan on src_faktuur_verrsec t0...
I think, you should try
CREATE INDEX src.src_faktuur_verrsec_codesubstr ON
src.src_faktuur_verrsec (substr(src.src_faktuur_verrsec.code,1,2))
Cheers
Sven.
nicky schrieb:
> Hello again,
>
> thanks for all the quick replies.
>
> It seems i wasn't entirely correct on my previous post, i've mixed up
> some times/numbers.
>
> Below the correct numbers
>
> MSSQL: SELECT COUNT(*) from JOIN (without insert) 17 minutes
> PostgreSQL: SELECT COUNT(*) from JOIN (without insert) 33 minutes
> PostgreSQL: complete query 55 minutes
<snip snip snip>
>
> A lot of improvement also in the select count: 33 minutes vs 10 minutes.
>
>
> To us, the speeds are good. Very happy with the performance increase on
> that select with join, since 90% of the queries are SELECT based.
>
> The query results in 7551616 records, so that's about 4500 inserts per
> second. I'm not sure if that is fast or not. Any further tips would be
> welcome.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | nicky | 2006-06-22 12:10:50 | Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. |
Previous Message | nicky | 2006-06-22 09:48:45 | Re: Speeding up query, Joining 55mil and 43mil records. |