From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Oliver Crosby <ryusei(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Looking for tips |
Date: | 2005-07-19 19:01:00 |
Message-ID: | 8446.1121799660@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Oliver Crosby <ryusei(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> The queries are all simple insert or select statements on single tables.
> Eg. select x from table where y=?; or insert into table (a, b, c)
> values (?, ?, ?);
> In the case of selects where it's a large table, there's an index on
> the column being searched, so in terms of the example above, x is
> either a pkey column or other related field, and y is a non-pkey
> column.
If you're running only a single query at a time (no multiple clients),
then this is pretty much the definition of a MySQL-friendly workload;
I'd have to say we are doing really well if we are only 50% slower.
Postgres doesn't have any performance advantages until you get into
complex queries or a significant amount of concurrency.
You could possibly get some improvement if you can re-use prepared plans
for the queries; but this will require some fooling with the client code
(I'm not sure if DBD::Pg even has support for it at all).
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PFC | 2005-07-19 19:05:27 | Re: Impact of checkpoint_segments under continual load conditions |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2005-07-19 18:58:20 | Re: Looking for tips |