Re: Performance comparison between Postgres and Greenplum

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Suvankar Roy <suvankar(dot)roy(at)tcs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance comparison between Postgres and Greenplum
Date: 2009-07-15 03:40:38
Message-ID: dcc563d10907142040u21a48979g56dc197ff926848d@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Suvankar Roy<suvankar(dot)roy(at)tcs(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have some 99,000 records in a table (OBSERVATION_ALL) in a Postgres DB as
> well as a Greenplum DB.
>
> The Primary key is a composite one comprising of 2 columns (so_no,
> serial_no).
>
> The execution of the following query takes 8214.016 ms in Greenplum but only
> 729.134 ms in Postgres.
> select * from observation_all order by so_no, serial_no;
>
> I believe that execution time in greenplum should be less compared to
> postgres. Can anybody throw some light, it would be of great help.

What versions are you comparing?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Marlowe 2009-07-15 04:52:27 Re: Poor overall performance unless regular VACUUM FULL
Previous Message ning 2009-07-15 03:10:44 Repeated Query is much slower in PostgreSQL8.2.4 than DB2 9.1