Thanks for all the suggestions. It seems that creating indices, or even
import data using a copy is easy to implement. I also have some jobs
that create reports and want to try if I gain anything if i work reports
in parallel.
will give it a try in the next week and let you know the resuls.
Ale
On Feb 10, 2005, at 12:49 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
Hi guys,
i'm planning try to do a comparative between some DBMS
and postgresql (informix, oracle, m$ sql server,
firebird and even mysql) i'm coordinating with people
in the irc spanish postgresql channel.
2) point me to a good benchmark test or s
Does anyone have any idea why there be over a 4s difference between running
the statement directly and using explain analyze? Multiple runs give the
same result and I've tested on several servers.
db=# \timing
Timing is on.
db=# select count(*) from answer;
count
530576
(1 row)
Time
Chris Kratz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does anyone have any idea why there be over a 4s difference between running
> the statement directly and using explain analyze?
> Aggregate (cost=9848.12..9848.12 rows=1 width=0) (actual
> time=4841.231..4841.235 rows=1 loops=1)
>-> Seq Scan on an
On Thursday 10 February 2005 01:58 pm, Tom Lane wrote:
> Chris Kratz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Does anyone have any idea why there be over a 4s difference between
> > running the statement directly and using explain analyze?
> >
> > Aggregate (cost=9848.12..9848.12 rows=1 width=0) (actual
>
On February 10, 2005 10:58 am, Tom Lane wrote:
> Chris Kratz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Does anyone have any idea why there be over a 4s difference between
> > running the statement directly and using explain analyze?
> >
> > Aggregate (cost=9848.12..9848.12 rows=1 width=0) (actual
> > time=
On Thursday 10 February 2005 03:09 pm, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> On February 10, 2005 10:58 am, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Chris Kratz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Does anyone have any idea why there be over a 4s difference between
> > > running the statement directly and using explain analyze?
> >
On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 08:21:09 -0500, Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If you plan on making your results public be very careful with the
> license agreements on the other db's. I know Oracle forbids the
> release of benchmark numbers without their approval.
...as all of the other commercial da
Mitch Pirtle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It would be really useful to know if anyone has ever been punished for
> doing this, as IANAL but that restriction is going to be very, VERY
> difficult to back up in court without precedence. Is this just a
> deterrent, or is it real?
If Oracle doesn't e
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 01:38:13 -0500, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If Oracle doesn't eat your rear for lunch,
That would be more like an appetizer at a california cuisine place.
> it would only be because you
> hadn't annoyed them sufficiently for them to bother. Under the terms of
>
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 01:38:13 -0500, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mitch Pirtle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It would be really useful to know if anyone has ever been punished for
> > doing this, as IANAL but that restriction is going to be very, VERY
> > difficult to back up in court wit
11 matches
Mail list logo
