Re: Performance with temporary table
От | Decibel! |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance with temporary table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 83F6D568-0641-42CD-8A8D-845119CB3BA1@decibel.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance with temporary table (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance with temporary table
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Apr 8, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > samantha mahindrakar escribió: >> Well instead of creating a temp table everytime i just created a >> permanant table and insert the data into it everytime and truncate >> it. >> I created indexes on this permanent table too. This did improve the >> performance to some extent. >> >> Does using permanant tables also bloat the catalog or hinder the >> performance? > > In terms of catalog usage, permanent tables behave exactly the same as > temp tables. True, but the point is that you're not bloating the catalogs with thousands of temp table entries. I agree with others though: it certainly doesn't sound like there's any reason to be using temp tables here at all. This sounds like a case of trying to apply procedural programming techniques to a database instead of using set theory (which generally doesn't work well). -- Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel@decibel.org Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
Вложения
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: