Re: EXTERNAL storage and substring on long strings
От | Joe Conway |
---|---|
Тема | Re: EXTERNAL storage and substring on long strings |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3F297CBA.1080703@joeconway.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | EXTERNAL storage and substring on long strings (Scott Cain <cain@cshl.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: EXTERNAL storage and substring on long strings
Re: EXTERNAL storage and substring on long strings |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Scott Cain wrote: > Index Scan using feature_pkey on feature (cost=0.00..3.01 rows=1 > width=153) (actual time=954.13..954.14 rows=1 loops=1) > Index Cond: (feature_id = 1) > Total runtime: 954.26 msec > (3 rows) > > Whoa! That's not what I expected, the time to do the query got more > that twice as long. So I think, maybe it was just an unlucky section, > and overall performance will be much better. So I write a perl script > to do substring queries over all of my chromosomes at various positions > and lengths (20,000 queries total). For comparison, I also ran the same > script, extracting the chromosomes via sql and doing the substring in > perl. Here's what happened: Hmmm, what happens if you compare with a shorter substring, e.g.: explain analyze select substring(residues from 1000000 for 2000) from feature where feature_id=1; I'm just guessing, but it might be that the extra I/O time to read 20K of uncompressed text versus the smaller compressed text is enough to swamp the time saved from not needing to uncompress. Any other ideas out there? Joe
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: