On Tuesday 15 May 2001 14:40, you wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have 2 tables :
>
> CREATE TABLE e_kalkn (
> idINT4 NOT NULL,
> roba VARCHAR(6) NOT NULL,
> dat DATENOT NU
ble to use Postgresql
for a project.
> -Original Message-
> From: snpe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 11:59 AM
> To: Stephan Szabo
> Cc: PostgreSQL-General
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Performance aggregates
>
>
> On Tuesday 15 May 2001 1
If your query is not using the correct index files, you're query will run
slowly. Please post the output from EXPLAIN.
-r
At 09:00 PM 5/15/01 +0200, snpe wrote:
>On Tuesday 15 May 2001 17:28, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 May 2001, snpe wrote:
> > > Table e_kalkn have 4668 rows and e_ka
snpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> select roba,sum(izn)
> from e_kalkn k,e_kalkns ks
> where k.id=ks.id
> group by roba
> order by roba
>
> is 2.5 times faster on one commercial database
That other DBMS is probably implementing the GROUP BY + aggregate
using a hash table to compute all the aggre
On Tuesday 15 May 2001 17:28, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2001, snpe wrote:
> > Table e_kalkn have 4668 rows and e_kalkns 101170 rows.
> >
> > Query :
> >
> > select roba,sum(izn)
> > from e_kalkn k,e_kalkns ks
> > where k.id=ks.id
> > group by roba
> > order by roba
> >
> > is 2.5 t
On Tuesday 15 May 2001 17:28, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2001, snpe wrote:
> > Table e_kalkn have 4668 rows and e_kalkns 101170 rows.
> >
> > Query :
> >
> > select roba,sum(izn)
> > from e_kalkn k,e_kalkns ks
> > where k.id=ks.id
> > group by roba
> > order by roba
> >
> > is 2.5 t
On Tue, 15 May 2001, snpe wrote:
> Table e_kalkn have 4668 rows and e_kalkns 101170 rows.
>
> Query :
>
> select roba,sum(izn)
> from e_kalkn k,e_kalkns ks
> where k.id=ks.id
> group by roba
> order by roba
>
> is 2.5 times faster on one commercial database (there are tests on Internet
>
