Hi, I think it's a caching problem.
On my system, PostgreSQL takes about 181 ms, and H2 takes about 920 ms (the first time), 582 ms (after running a few times). When using a very large cache size (-Xmx128m, SET CACHE_SIZE 512*1024), H2 takes 62 ms. A bit strange is that if the cache is not big enough to hold the complete table, then it is better to use a small cache than a large cache: with a cache size of 128 (KB) I get 287 ms which is about double as fast as the default. That means the cache is not 'scan resistant'. I will add a feature request to improve the cache. Regards, Thomas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en.
