Valerie Schneider DSI/DEV wrote:
Hi,
I have some problem of performance on a PG database, and I don't
know how to improve. I Have two questions : one about the storage
of data, one about tuning queries. If possible !
My job is to compare Oracle and Postgres. All our operational databases
have been
I am guessing that Oracle can satisfy Q4 entirely via index access,
whereas Pg has to visit the table as well.
Having said that, a few partial indexes may be worth trying out on
data.num_poste (say 10 or so), this won't help the table access but
could lower the index cost. If you combine this
Hi,
I have some problem of performance on a PG database, and I don't
know how to improve. I Have two questions : one about the storage
of data, one about tuning queries. If possible !
My job is to compare Oracle and Postgres. All our operational databases
have been running under Oracle for about
On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 08:44, Valerie Schneider DSI/DEV wrote:
Hi,
I have some problem of performance on a PG database, and I don't
know how to improve. I Have two questions : one about the storage
of data, one about tuning queries. If possible !
My job is to compare Oracle and Postgres.
not so bad for oracle. What about for PG ? How data is stored
I agree with the datatype issue. Smallint, bigint, integer... add a
constraint...
Also the way order of the records in the database is very important. As
you seem to have a very large static population in your table, you should
You often make sums. Why not use separate tables to cache these sums by
month, by poste, by whatever ?
Rule on insert on the big table updates the cache tables.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose
[forwarded to performance]
The result is that for short queries (Q1 and Q2) it runs in a few
seconds on both Oracle and PG. The difference becomes important with
Q3 : 8 seconds with oracle
80 sec with PG
and too much with Q4 : 28s with oracle
17m20s with PG !
