Re: Serious performance problem
От | Tille, Andreas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Serious performance problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.33.0110301036340.6117-100000@wr-linux02.rki.ivbb.bund.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Serious performance problem (Jean-Michel POURE <jm.poure@freesurf.fr>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, Jean-Michel POURE wrote: > A possible solution would be: > CREATE TABLE foo AS > SELECT Hauptdaten_Fall.MeldeKategorie, Count(Hauptdaten_Fall.ID) AS Anz > FROM Hauptdaten_Fall WHERE (((Hauptdaten_Fall.IstAktuell)=20)) > GROUP BY Hauptdaten_Fall.MeldeKategorie ORDER BY > Hauptdaten_Fall.MeldeKategorie; Sorry, this is NO solution of my problem. > On 300.000 records, you will get instant results. There are plenty of > tricks like this one. If you employ them, you will ***never*** reach the > limits of a double Pentium III computer with U3W discs. It is really no help if I solve the speed issue of this *very simple, zeroth order try*. I repeat a hava a plenty of queries which do much more complicated stuff than this. This is just a rude strip down of the problem fit for debugging/profg issues of the database *server*. Simple tricks on a simple example do not help. > If you need to answer this message, please reply on > pgsql-general@postgresql.org. No, because ... > >I discussed a problem concerning the speed of PostgreSQL compared to > >MS SQL server heavily on postgres-general list. The thread starts with > >message > > > > http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1035557 I did so and got the explicit advise of Tom to ask here. Consider the problem as a benchmark. I would love to see postgresql as the winner. Kind regards Andreas.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: