Re: Query optimization using order by and limit
От | ktm@rice.edu |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Query optimization using order by and limit |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20110922134125.GJ30871@staff-mud-56-27.rice.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Query optimization using order by and limit (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Query optimization using order by and limit
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:22:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Viscuso <michael.viscuso@getcarbonblack.com> writes: > > Greg/Tom, you are correct, these columns should be modified to whatever > > is easiest for Postgres to recognize 64-bit unsigned integers. Would > > you still recommend bigint for unsigned integers? I likely read the > > wrong documentation that suggested bigint for signed 64-bit integers and > > numeric(20) for unsigned 64-bit integers. > > Unsigned? Oh, hm, that's a bit of a problem because we don't have any > unsigned types. If you really need to go to 2^64 and not 2^63 then > you're stuck with numeric ... but that last bit is costing ya a lot. > > regards, tom lane > Hi Michael, If you have access to the application, you can map the unsigned 64-bits to the PostgreSQL signed 64-bit type with a simple subtraction. That will allow you to drop all the numeric use. Also if the guid is a 64-bit values stuffed into a numeric(20), you can do it there as well. I achieved a hefty performance boost by making those application level changes in a similar situation. Regards, Ken
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: