Re: SQL Functions and plan time
От | Richard Huxton |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SQL Functions and plan time |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200307081127.37620.dev@archonet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SQL Functions and plan time (nolan@celery.tssi.com) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Tuesday 08 Jul 2003 9:34 am, nolan@celery.tssi.com wrote: > > So why am I getting substantially different times for identical queries > > (except for parameter substitution) > > This sounds like the question I asked two weeks ago. > > What I concluded was that though they may be identical queries, they are > not identical in terms of what happens when you execute them. > > Why? Because the tuples have been updated, meaning that the affected > rows are in different physical locations than they used to be in both > the table and in any indexes. The "SELECT" part, which is the determining factor in all of this is reading unchanged data from tables unchanged since a vacuum full/analyse. Besides, the timings are consistent. > Running a vacuum analyze and rebuilding indexes between runs should > produce more consistent timings, if consistent timings are important. > > Readonly queries running on an otherwise idle server should produce > more consistent timings, subject to caching issues. Yep - which is why I'm puzzled. It's the readonly part of this that's taking the extra time. The DELETE/INSERT are to another table - I'm summarising activity logs into an hourly stats table. -- Richard Huxton
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: