From: | Nikolas Everett <nik9000(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kevin Kempter <kevink(at)consistentstate(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Query tuning |
Date: | 2009-08-19 17:31:30 |
Message-ID: | d4e11e980908191031q3871deadi2dbc3c6f70ffb688@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
2009/8/19 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com>
> that seems to be the killer:
>
> and time >= extract ('epoch' from timestamp '2009-08-12')
> and time < extract ('epoch' from timestamp '2009-08-13' )
>
> You probably need an index on time/epoch:
>
> CREATE INDEX foo ON table(extract ('epoch' from timestamp time );
It looks like those extracts just make constant integer times. You probably
just create an index on the time column.
Also, why not store times as timestamps?
>
>
> or something like that, vacuum analyze and retry.
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Kempter | 2009-08-19 17:36:55 | Re: Query tuning |
Previous Message | Scott Carey | 2009-08-19 17:17:26 | Re: Query tuning |