Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS
От | Hannu Krosing |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1062673303.5200.135.camel@fuji.krosing.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS ("Relaxin" <me@yourhouse.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Relaxin kirjutas N, 04.09.2003 kell 03:28: > I have a table with 102,384 records in it, each record is 934 bytes. I created a test database on my Linux (RH9) laptop with 30GB/4200RPM ide drive and P3-1133Mhz, 768MB, populated it with 128000 rows of 930 bytes each and did [hannu@fuji hannu]$ time psql test100k -c 'select * from test' > /dev/null real 0m3.970s user 0m0.980s sys 0m0.570s so it seems definitely not a problem with postgres as such, but perhaps with Cygwin and/or ODBC driver I also ran the same query using the "standard" pg adapter: >>> import pg, time >>> >>> con = pg.connect('test100k') >>> >>> def getall(): ... t1 = time.time() ... res = con.query('select * from test') ... t2 = time.time() ... list = res.getresult() ... t3 = time.time() ... print t2 - t1, t3-t2 ... >>> getall() 3.27637195587 1.10105705261 >>> getall() 3.07413101196 0.996125936508 >>> getall() 3.03377199173 1.07322502136 which gave similar results ------------------------------ Hannu
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: