Re: Defining performance.

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Chris
Тема Re: Defining performance.
Дата
Msg-id 456FA235.1070406@gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Defining performance.  (Tobias Brox <tobias@nordicbet.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
Tobias Brox wrote:
> [nospam@hardgeus.com - Thu at 06:37:12PM -0600]
>> As my dataset has gotten larger I have had to throw more metal at the
>> problem, but I have also had to rethink my table and query design.  Just
>> because your data set grows linearly does NOT mean that the performance of
>> your query is guaranteed to grow linearly!  A sloppy query that runs OK
>> with 3000 rows in your table may choke horribly when you hit 50000.
>
> Then some limit is hit ... either the memory cache, or that the planner
> is doing an unlucky change of strategy when hitting 50000.

Not really. A bad query is a bad query (eg missing a join element). It
won't show up for 3000 rows, but will very quickly if you increase that
by a reasonable amount. Even as simple as a missing index on a join
column won't show up for a small dataset but will for a larger one.

It's a pretty common mistake to assume that a small dataset will behave
exactly the same as a larger one - not always the case.

--
Postgresql & php tutorials
http://www.designmagick.com/

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Mark Kirkwood
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Bad iostat numbers
Следующее
От: Tobias Brox
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Defining performance.