Re: Sort time
От | pginfo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sort time |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3DD73784.11ED2512@t1.unisoftbg.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Sort time (Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Sort time
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Hi, Stephan Szabo wrote: > On Sat, 16 Nov 2002, pginfo wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: > > > > Here's a question: is the total size of the column a good indicator of the > > > > sort_mem required? Or does the rowsize affect it somehow? > > > > > > It will include all the data that's supposed to be output by the sort... > > > both the key column(s) and the others. > > > > > > > Hmm it is not clear for me.Let we have all data. > > If I make sort by S.OP ( it is INT) it take < 6 sek for sort. > > I think we move all this data anly the number of comparation is by INT. I think > > the number of comparation > > is ~ n * ln(n). > > If we sort by S.IDS_xxx we have also n*ln(n) comparations but in > > varchar(string). > > I don't think that it can take 50 sek. > > > > Is it not so? > > Have you tried setting up another database in "C" locale and compared the > timings there? I'd wonder if maybe there's some extra copying going on > given the comments in varstr_cmp. No, I do not have any info about it.I will see if it is possible ( the data are not so simple). If it is possible I will make the tests. Have no one that have 700K row in thow tables? It is simple to test: 1. Run query that returns ~700K rows from this tables. 2. Make sort. It is interest only the sort time! regards, Ivan.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: