| From: | Matthew Wakeling <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: difficulties with time based queries |
| Date: | 2009-04-06 12:24:48 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.00.0904061304440.791@aragorn.flymine.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Rainer Mager wrote:
> The data should be mostly ordered by date. It is all logged in semi-realtime
> such that 99% will be logged within an hour of the timestamp. Also, as
> stated above, during this query it was about 1.2 MB/s, which I know isn't
> great. I admit this isn't the best hardware in the world, but I would expect
> better than that for linear queries.
Might you have an unbalanced index tree? Reindexing would also solve that
problem.
Matthew
--
There are only two kinds of programming languages: those people always
bitch about and those nobody uses. (Bjarne Stroustrup)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2009-04-06 12:35:30 | Re: Best replication solution? |
| Previous Message | Mario Splivalo | 2009-04-06 12:20:47 | Re: Forcing seq_scan off for large table joined with tiny table yeilds improved performance |