Re: Re: Performance aggregates - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Re: Performance aggregates
Date
Msg-id 200105181437.f4IEbBm17766@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Performance aggregates  (Nils Zonneveld <nils@mbit.nl>)
Responses Re: Re: Performance aggregates  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
> > is 2.5 times faster on one commercial database (there are tests on Internet
> > that say 'Postgresql is faster than that database).
> > I can't say which database it is.
> >
>
> The 'order by' statement is redundant since you use already 'group by'.
> Furthermore you can speed up the query by creating an index on your
> 'group by' fields (in this case 'roba').
>
> If one database is faster than the other depends on what you test. I've
> read that PostgreSQL can be slow with queries that contain a group by,
> although I did not experience such thing myself.

Is there a TODO item I can add here folks?

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Hunter Hillegas
Date:
Subject: Disadvantage to RPMs?
Next
From: Stephan Szabo
Date:
Subject: Re: CVS, initdb and catalog version