Postgres Professional
   

Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon

From: Andreas Pflug
Subject: Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon
Date: ,
Msg-id: 4267A52A.8080504@pse-consulting.de
(view: Whole thread, Raw)
In response to: Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  ("Joel Fradkin")
List: pgsql-performance

Tree view

Re: Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)  ("Anjan Dave", )
 Re: Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)  ("Joel Fradkin", )
  Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (Josh Berkus, )
   Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  ("Joel Fradkin", )
    Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (Josh Berkus, )
     Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (Vivek Khera, )
    Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (John A Meinel, )
     Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  ("Joel Fradkin", )
      Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (John A Meinel, )
       Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (Tom Lane, )
        Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  ("Joel Fradkin", )
       Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  ("Joel Fradkin", )
        Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  ("Jim C. Nasby", )
         Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (Kevin Brown, )
          Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (Josh Berkus, )
           Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (Kevin Brown, )
            Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  ("Jim C. Nasby", )
      Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (Josh Berkus, )
      Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon  (Andreas Pflug, ) 
Joel Fradkin wrote:
> I did think of something similar just loading the data tables with junk
> records and I may visit that idea with Josh.
>
> I did just do some comparisons on timing of a plain select * from tbl where
> indexed column = x and it was considerably slower then both MSSQL and MYSQL,
> so I am still a bit confused. This still might be configuration issue (I ran
> on my 2gig desktop and the 8 gig Linux box comparisons were all ran on the
> same machines as far MSSQL, MYSQL, and Postgres.
> I turned off postgres when running MYSQL and turned off MYSQL when running
> postgres, MSSQL had one of the two running while I tested it.
>
> For the 360,000 records returned MYSQL did it in 40 seconds first run and 17
> seconds second run.
>
> MSSQL did it in 56 seconds first run and 16 seconds second run.
>
> Postgres was on the second run
> Total query runtime: 17109 ms.
> Data retrieval runtime: 72188 ms.
> 331640 rows retrieved.

Beware!
 From the data, I can see that you're probably using pgAdmin3.
The time to execute your query including transfer of all data to the
client is 17s in this example, while displaying it (i.e. pure GUI and
memory alloc stuff) takes 72s. Execute to a file to avoid this.

Regards,
Andreas

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous:
From: Enrico Weigelt
Date:
Subject: index not used
Next:
From: Alex Turner
Date:
Subject: Re: Index bloat problem?