Re: query performance, though it was timestamps,maybe just table size?

[Henry Drexler <alonup8tb@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Could you do it for the recursive
SQL (the one inside the function) like you had previously done for the
regular explain?

Cheers,

Jeff

Here they are:

for the 65 million row table:
"Index Scan using ctn_source on massive  (cost=0.00..189.38 rows=1 width=28) (actual time=85.802..85.806 rows=1 loops=1)"
"  Index Cond: (ctn = 1302050134::bigint)"
"  Filter: (dateof <@ '["2012-07-03 14:00:00","2012-07-10 14:00:00"]'::tsrange)"
"  Buffers: shared read=6"
"Total runtime: 85.891 ms"



for the 30 million row table:
"Index Scan using ctn_dateof on massive  (cost=0.00..80.24 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.018..0.020 rows=1 loops=1)"
"  Index Cond: (ctn = 1302050134::bigint)"
"  Filter: (dateof <@ '[2012-07-03,2012-07-11)'::daterange)"
"  Buffers: shared hit=5"
"Total runtime: 0.046 ms"


Thank you.