Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
Subject Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)
Date
Msg-id 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA41EB41B@m0114.s-mxs.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)  ("Tille, Andreas" <TilleA@rki.de>)
Responses Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)
List pgsql-hackers
 
> > There is not much point in arguing a specific query case,
> It is no specific query case.  It is the speed of an index scan which
> goes like N if you do it with PostgreSQL and it goes like log N if
> you do not have to look back into the table like MS SQL server does.

I cannot see why you keep saying that. It is simply not true.
MS SQL shows a behavior of O(N), it is simply, that PostgreSQL
because of well described methodology takes longer per affected row.
The speed difference is linear, no matter how many rows
are affected.

Andreas 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong
Next
From: "Tille, Andreas"
Date:
Subject: Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)