Re: query performance, though it was timestamps,maybe just table size?

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Could you do it for the recursive
> SQL (the one inside the function) like you had previously done for the
> regular explain?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jeff
>

Here they are:

for the 65 million row table:
"Index Scan using ctn_source on massive (cost=0.00..189.38 rows=1
width=28) (actual time=85.802..85.806 rows=1 loops=1)"
" Index Cond: (ctn = 1302050134::bigint)"
" Filter: (dateof <@ '["2012-07-03 14:00:00","2012-07-10
14:00:00"]'::tsrange)"
" Buffers: shared read=6"
"Total runtime: 85.891 ms"

for the 30 million row table:
"Index Scan using ctn_dateof on massive (cost=0.00..80.24 rows=1 width=24)
(actual time=0.018..0.020 rows=1 loops=1)"
" Index Cond: (ctn = 1302050134::bigint)"
" Filter: (dateof <@ '[2012-07-03,2012-07-11)'::daterange)"
" Buffers: shared hit=5"
"Total runtime: 0.046 ms"

Thank you.