Re: Performance pb vs SQLServer.

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: Stéphane COEZ <scoez(at)harrysoftware(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Performance pb vs SQLServer.
Date: 2005-08-15 08:18:03
Message-ID: 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE6C789B@algol.sollentuna.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

> Hi,
>
> I have a perfomance issue :
>
> I run PG (8.0.3) and SQLServer2000 on a Windows2000 Server
> (P4 1,5Ghz 512Mo) I have a table (3200000 rows) and I run
> this single query :
>
> select cod from mytable group by cod
> I have an index on cod (char(4) - 88 different values)
>
> PG = ~ 20 sec.
> SQLServer = < 8 sec
>
>
> the explain is :
>
> HashAggregate (cost=64410.09..64410.09 rows=55 width=8)
> -> Seq Scan on mytable (cost=0.00..56325.27 rows=3233927 width=8)
>
>
> if I switch to "enable_hashagg = false" (just for a try...)
> the planner will choose my index :
>
> Group (cost=0.00..76514.01 rows=55 width=8)
> -> Index Scan using myindex on mytable
> (cost=0.00..68429.20 rows=3233927
> width=8)
>
> but performance will be comparable to previous test.
>
> So with or without using Index I have the same result.

Out of curiosity, what plan do you get from SQLServer? I bet it's a clustered index scan...

//Magnus

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2005-08-15 08:25:47 Re: Performance pb vs SQLServer.
Previous Message dario_d_s 2005-08-15 05:51:55 Re: Performance pb vs SQLServer.