Re: add_path optimization

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: add_path optimization
Date: 2009-02-03 03:48:45
Message-ID: 20090203034845.GS8123@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Robert Haas (robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> I'm interested, but I need maybe a 1GB data set, or smaller. The
> thing that we are benchmarking is the planner, and planning times are
> related to the complexity of the database and the accompanying
> queries, not the raw volume of data. (It's not size that matters,
> it's how you use it?) In fact, in a large database, one could argue
> that there is less reason to care about the planner, because the
> execution time will dominate anyway. I'm interested in complex
> queries in web/OLTP type applications, where you need the query to be
> planned and executed in 400 ms at the outside (and preferably less
> than half of that).

We prefer that our geocoding be fast... :) Doing 1 state should give
you about the right size (half to 1G of data). I'll try to put together
a good test set this week.

Stephen

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-02-03 03:54:55 Re: add_path optimization
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-02-03 03:45:16 Re: add_path optimization