| From: | "Relaxin" <noname(at)spam(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS |
| Date: | 2003-09-04 07:48:42 |
| Message-ID: | bj6qoa$1jln$1@news.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> Can you tell us what you were *actually* doing? Somehow it sounds as
> though the other databases were throwing away the data whereas
> PostgreSQL was returning it all "kawhump!" in one batch.
All of the databases that I tested the query against gave me immediate
access to ANY row of the resultset once the data had been returned.
Ex. If I'm currently at the first row and then wanted to goto the 100,000
row, I would be there immediately, and if I wanted to then goto the 5
row...same thing, I have the record immediately!
The other databases I tested against stored the entire resultset on the
Server, I'm not sure what PG does...It seems that brings the entire
resultset client side.
If that is the case, how can I have PG store the resultset on the Server AND
still allow me immediate access to ANY row in the resultset?
> What programs were you using to submit the queries?
I used the same program for all of the database. I was using ODBC as
connectivity.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-09-04 08:00:51 | Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS |
| Previous Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-09-04 07:27:35 | Re: PostgreSQL Reliability when fsync = false on Linux-XFS |