Hi all, Thanks for the replies and sorry for the late response, I have been away for a few days. Concerning the performance: 1 ms per row seems slow knowing that the entire database is less then 64MB and therefore should easily fit into memory and the client (pgAdmin III) runs on the server. I am going to test another database to check the performance of the hardware. -Kai > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Grittner [mailto:Kevin.Grittner@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 8:59 PM > To: Kai Otto; pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Slow performance > > "Kai Otto" <kotto@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Time taken: > > > > 35.833 ms (i.e. roughly 35 seconds) > > Which is it? 35 ms or 35 seconds? > > > Number of rows: > > > > 121830 > > > > Number of columns: > > > > 38 > > > This is extremely slow for a database server. > > > > Can anyone help me in finding the problem? > > > "Seq Scan on "Frame" (cost=0.00..9537.30 rows=121830 width=541) > > (actual time=0.047..93.318 rows=121830 loops=1)" > > > > "Total runtime: 100.686 ms" > > Assuming 35 seconds for the 121 K rows, it would seem that you're > taking less than 1 ms per row on the database server, which may not > be too bad, depending on how many of them are read from disk. The > rest of the time would seem to be in the network and the client. > That's where you need to fix something if you want it to be faster. > > With only a fraction of 1% of the run time being on the database > server, any attempt to tune things there can't improve performance > by more than that fraction of a percent. > > -Kevin -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
