Re: Sort performance on large tables
От | Charlie Savage |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sort performance on large tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 43722E4A.8060904@interserv.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Sort performance on large tables (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Hi Simon, Thanks for the response Simon. > PostgreSQL can do HashAggregates as well as GroupAggregates, just like > Oracle. HashAggs avoid the sort phase, so would improve performance > considerably. The difference in performance you are getting is because > of the different plan used. Did you specifically do anything to Oracle > to help it get that plan, or was it a pure out-of-the-box install (or > maybe even a "set this up for Data Warehousing" install)? It was an out-of-the-box plan with the standard database install option (wasn't a Data Warehousing install). > Can you let us know how high you have to set work_mem before an EXPLAIN > (not EXPLAIN ANALYZE) chooses the HashAgg plan? The planner picked a HashAggregate only when I set work_mem to 2097151 - which I gather is the maximum allowed value according to a message returned from the server. > Please be aware that publishing Oracle performance results is against > the terms of their licence and we seek to be both fair and legitimate, > especially within this public discussion forum. Sorry, I didn't realize - I'll be more vague next time. Charlie
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: