Re: Poor performance of group by query

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Poor performance of group by query
Date: 2004-04-16 22:57:51
Message-ID: 87pta78r9s.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

> stats=# explain analyze SELECT work_units, min(raw_rank) AS rank FROM Trank_work_overall GROUP BY work_units;
>
> ...
>
> raw_rank | bigint |
> work_units | bigint |

If you create a copy of the same table using regular integers does that run
fast? And a copy of the table using bigints is still slow like the original?

I know bigints are less efficient than integers because they're handled using
dynamically allocated memory. This especially bites aggregate functions. But I
don't see why it would be any slower for a hash aggregate than a regular
aggregate. It's a pretty gross amount of time for 18k records.

There was a thought a while back about making 64-bit machines handle 64-bit
datatypes like bigints without pointers. That would help on your Opteron.

--
greg

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-04-16 23:45:01 Re: sunquery and estimated rows
Previous Message Manfred Koizar 2004-04-16 22:26:22 Re: query slows down with more accurate stats