None of these tests were run over a network - all local. Given that the
hardware is very different, however, I did find it strange that all win2k
(Pro, not server) served up the records in almost exactly the same time,
while the 2.4 celeron is 80ms! In terms of processor speed, that difference
in time is not explained between the 2.4GHz and 1.8GHz machines. Perhaps it
is a memory issue since the 1.8GHz box does have only 256, but I've been
running Postgres on these machines for some time now and I don't recall this
sort of latency with earlier versions.
I'll install an earlier version of postgres and do a little test.
Stay tuned...
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Huxton [mailto:dev@archonet.com]
Sent: March 23, 2005 4:29 AM
To: A. Mous
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Simple query takes a long time on win2K
A. Mous wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a table with about 1500 records. My query is very basic: SELECT *
> FROM foo;
>
> With postgres 8.0.1 on Win XP (Celeron 2400, 500MB RAM) it returns the
> results in about 80ms. The same query on the same database, tested on
three
> different win2k machines all running 8.0.1, takes roughly 4 seconds.
Win2K
> machines are as follows:
>
> 1) PIII 800, 256MB RAM
> 2) Celeron 400, 128MB RAM
> 3) PII 233, 128MB RAM
>
> All machines are currently using the default settings upon install. I've
> tried adjusting shared_buffers and work_mem but nothing seems to make any
> difference.
Hmm - very strange. It couldn't be network related could it? IIRC on
Windows machines you connect via localhost (because there aren't any
unix domain sockets). There have been reports of different performance
over network connections, but I don't know if this applies to local
connections or if it's as serious as this.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
