Re: Slow response from 'SELECT * FROM table'
От | Wei Weng |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Slow response from 'SELECT * FROM table' |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5.1.1.6.0.20021111121838.00ba47e8@mail.futuris.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Slow response from 'SELECT * FROM table' (Jakub Ouhrabka <jouh8664@ss1000.ms.mff.cuni.cz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Slow response from 'SELECT * FROM table'
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
I am curious, what performance difference does it make to use vanilla SELECT with to use cursor (for retrieving the entire records)? Thanks Wei At 11:13 AM 11/11/2002 +0100, Jakub Ouhrabka wrote: >hi, > >do you really need all 500k records? if not i'd suggest using limit and >offset clause (select * from table order by xy limit 100 - xy should be >indexed...) or if you really need all records use a cursor. > >kuba > >On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Jirka Novak wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I have table with 30 columns and 30000..500000 rows. When I make > > 'SELECT * FROM table' postgresql start doing something and return first > > row after 10s (for 30k rows) and after 5min (500k rows). It looks like > > it copy whole response to temp space and after that it shows it. > > I don't know why. I tested same table structure and datas on Oracle > > and MSSQL and both returned first row immediatly. > > Have someone any idea? > > > > Jirka Novak > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > > > > >---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate >subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your >message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: