From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Joost Kraaijeveld" <J(dot)Kraaijeveld(at)Askesis(dot)nl> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Pgsql-Performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Performance PG 8.0 on dual opteron / 4GB / 3ware |
Date: | 2005-11-07 09:17:12 |
Message-ID: | E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4CC3972@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joost Kraaijeveld [mailto:J(dot)Kraaijeveld(at)Askesis(dot)nl]
> Sent: 07 November 2005 09:03
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Tom Lane; Pgsql-Performance
> Subject: RE: [PERFORM] Performance PG 8.0 on dual opteron /
> 4GB / 3ware
>
> > Nothing - it just uses libpq's pqexec function. The speed issue in
> > pgAdmin is rendering the results in the grid which can be
> slow on some
> > OS's due to inefficiencies in some grid controls with large
> data sets.
> > That's why we give 2 times - the first is the query runtime on the
> > server, the second is data retrieval and rendering (iirc,
> it's been a
> > while).
> That is what I thought, but what could explain the difference in query
> runtime (78 seconds versus 5 seconds) ?
Not in terms of our code - we obviously do a little more than just run
the query, but I can't spot anything in there that should be
non-constant time.
Don't suppose it's anything as simple as you vacuuming in between is it?
Regards, Dave
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2005-11-07 09:46:38 | Re: Performance problem with pg8.0 |
Previous Message | Joost Kraaijeveld | 2005-11-07 09:02:59 | Re: Performance PG 8.0 on dual opteron / 4GB / 3ware |