> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 5:12 PM
> To: David Greco
> Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: Real vs Int performance
>
> David Greco writes:
> > Came across a problem I find perplexing. I recreat
On 1/27/2011 9:30 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
I'm not sure about orders of magnitude on the storage/index side, but my
tests gave us a 10% boost if just the keys are switched over to INT or
BIGINT.
Well, it depends on what you're doing. Searching by an integer vs.
searching by a text string will p
On 01/27/2011 08:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Not if you can persuade the client-side code to output integers as
integers. "numeric" type is orders of magnitude slower than integers.
I sadly have to vouch for this. My company converted an old Oracle app
and they changed all their primary keys (and
David Greco writes:
> Right you are. Kettle is turning the number(11) field from Oracle into
> a BigNumber, which is a decimal. If I cast the field into an Integer
> in Kettle and keep the field an integer in Postgres, I get good
> performance. Suspect the correct course of action would simply be
in Oracle
numeric(11,0) fields in Postgres.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 5:12 PM
To: David Greco
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Real vs Int performance
David Greco writes:
> Came acros
David Greco writes:
> Came across a problem I find perplexing. I recreated the dimensional tables
> in Oracle and the fields that are integers in Oracle became integers
> in Postgres. Was experiencing terrible performance during the load and
> narrowed down to a particular dimensional lookup pro
David Greco wrote:
> If I change this field from an integer to a real, I get about a
> 70x increase in performance of the query.
> I wished to simplify things a bit here (and don't yet know how to
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE a parameterized query).
> carrier_source_id | integer |
