Re: query execution time
| От | preetika tyagi |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: query execution time |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTimQjE1cMGLPVDH+SNsH4A+Mwx2+_T+rQ1dJAkhV@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: query execution time (Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@elevated-dev.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: query execution time
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
Thank you, Scott!
I tried running the same query after reboot and back-to-back, it was taking less time in both the cases. It means the problem is something else.
Can there be a reason which is more hardware/operating system specific and due to which the behavior is not uniform?
Preetika
I tried running the same query after reboot and back-to-back, it was taking less time in both the cases. It means the problem is something else.
Can there be a reason which is more hardware/operating system specific and due to which the behavior is not uniform?
Preetika
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@elevated-dev.com> wrote:
On Mar 21, 2011, at 9:55 AM, preetika tyagi wrote:Well, considering that random disk access is on the order of 10,000 times slower than RAM...
> For example, if A is 15 minutes, then B is 1.5 hrs.
But you can answer the question yourself by comparing the query run against cold caches (after a reboot, or various command-line tricks to purge cache) vs against warm caches (twice back-to-back).
--
Scott Ribe
scott_ribe@elevated-dev.com
http://www.elevated-dev.com/
(303) 722-0567 voice
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: