From: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: difference in query performance due to the inclusion of a polygon geometry field |
Date: | 2012-11-30 11:41:24 |
Message-ID: | 50B89B64.8050600@hogranch.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 11/30/12 3:28 AM, ivan marchesini wrote:
> Without the geometric field it takes around 86 ms !!
> With the geometric field it takes around 14000 ms !!
>
> These are the EXPLAIN ANALYSE results obtained when we perform the query
> without the geometric field:
> ____________________________
> ...
> "Total runtime: 3.285 ms"
> __________________________
>
>
> These are the EXPLAIN ANALYSE results obtained when we perform the query
> with the geometric field:
> ___________________________
> ....
> "Total runtime: 3.355 ms"
> __________________________
your examples don't seem to match your description.
both are within 100 microseconds.
I will say, sorting, formatting, and sending 200K * 1400 rows is going
to take a lot longer than 133 bytes * 1400 rows, if I can believe the
output of the explain analyzes.
--
john r pierce N 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2012-11-30 11:56:12 | Re: difference in query performance due to the inclusion of a polygon geometry field |
Previous Message | ivan marchesini | 2012-11-30 11:28:04 | difference in query performance due to the inclusion of a polygon geometry field |