Re: scale up (postgresql vs mssql)
От | Andy Colson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: scale up (postgresql vs mssql) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4FE1D365.2010204@squeakycode.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: scale up (postgresql vs mssql) (Eyal Wilde <eyal@impactsoft.co.il>) |
Ответы |
Re: scale up (postgresql vs mssql)
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 6/20/2012 1:01 AM, Eyal Wilde wrote: > Hi, all. > > this is an obligation from the past: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2012-05/msg00017.php > > the same test, that did ~230 results, is now doing ~700 results. that > is, BTW even better than mssql. > > the ultimate solution for that problem was to NOT to do "ON COMMIT > DELETE ROWS" for the temporary tables. instead, we just do "DELETE FROM > temp_table1". > > doing "TRUNCATE temp_table1" is defiantly the worst case (~100 results > in the same test). this is something we knew for a long time, which is > why we did "ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS", but eventually it turned out as far > from being the best. > > another minor issue is that when configuring > temp_tablespace='other_tablespace', the sequences of the temporary > tables remain on the 'main_tablespace'. > > i hope that will help making postgres even better :) > Did you ever try re-writing some of the temp table usage to use subselect's/views/cte/etc? -Andy
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: