Re: Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze
От | Harry Broomhall |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200310131421.PAA42261@haeb.noc.uk.easynet.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze (Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Shridhar Daithankar writes: > On Monday 13 October 2003 19:17, Harry Broomhall wrote: [SNIP] > > The input to this query is a fairly large (the example I'm working > > with has 335,000 rows) set of records containing numbers to be looked > > up in the lookup table. This lookup table has 239 rows. > > Can yu lookup those 239 values in 335,000 rows instead. The result will be > same but probably it will be lot moer faster... I'm not entirely sure how I would do this, as the 'lookup' is actualy a join. I thought that the order of nameing the joined tables didn't matter (except for 'left' and 'right'), similar to the fact that 1 + 2 is the same as 2 + 1. [SNIP] > > An explain analyze in both cases+postgresql.conf tuning and hardware/software > information would be very good. Compress it before you post if you think its > too big.. This would amount to an attachment, and I'm not sure how this list views such things. I've emailed you the file separately. Regards, Harry.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: