From: | Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Help with extracting large volumes of records across related tables |
Date: | 2004-09-13 14:00:35 |
Message-ID: | opsd9qi9udcq72hf@musicbox |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Thanks for the thanks !
Generally, when grouping stuff together, it is a good idea to have two
sorted lists, and to scan them simultaneously. I have already used this
solution several times outside of Postgres, and it worked very well (it
was with Berkeley DB and there were 3 lists to scan in order). The fact
that Python can very easily virtualize these lists using generators makes
it possible to do it without consuming too much memory.
> Pierre-Frederic, Paul,
>
> Thanks for your fast response (especially for the python code and
> performance figure) - I'll chase this up as a solution - looks most
> promising!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Damien
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-09-13 14:38:08 | Re: Determine optimal fdatasync/fsync, O_SYNC/O_DSYNC options |
Previous Message | Damien Dougan | 2004-09-13 13:44:45 | Re: Help with extracting large volumes of records across related tables |