| From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alexander Elgert <alexander_elgert(at)adiva(dot)de>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: postgres slower on nested queries |
| Date: | 2007-03-07 09:16:53 |
| Message-ID: | 45EE8305.3010703@archonet.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> writes:
>> Alexander Elgert wrote:
>>> I found the postgres version VERY slow, so a decided to fetch
>
>> Define VERY - it took what, milliseconds to do this? Seconds? Hours?
>
> I think he's complaining that the standards-conformant view in Postgres
> is slower than the specialized SHOW command in mysql. For an
> apples-to-apples comparison, select directly from the system catalogs
> --- the information_schema views are definitely slower, because they
> have to enforce various spec restrictions (eg that you can't see info
> about tables you don't have access to).
I'm still seeing times ~ 3ms to find one table and ~18ms for one column
on my test server. Around ~ 300ms for 1169 columns. I still can't quite
see what you'd do that would need to know about individual columns in
such a hurry.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ed L. | 2007-03-07 09:29:08 | Re: vacuum error |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-03-07 08:42:34 | Re: No buffer space available |