On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 22:39 +0800, K C Lau wrote: > >Is a 51ms query really such a problem for you? > > Unfortunately yes, as our target performance is in the high hundreds of > transactions per sec. And 51 ms is already the best case for a single > select, with everything cached in memory immediately after the same select > which took 390 ms on a quiet system.
If the current value is used so often, use two tables - one with a current view only of the row maintained using UPDATE. Different performance issues maybe, but at least not correlated subquery ones. Best Regards, Simon Riggs ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org