Thread

  1. Re: [GENERAL] identifying performance hits: how to ???

    davidb@vectormath.com — 2000-01-12T16:21:54Z

    By asking about missing something fundamental, you have invited
    less-than-expert feedback (i.e. feedback from me).
    
    'adding a record doubles the retrieval time' makes it sound as though
    somewhere in your query to populate the grid control you are requiring a
    combinatorial operation (that is, "compare every record in table A with
    every record in table B").  This, of course, assumes that there is some
    discrepancy between what you are running on Postgres and what you tried on
    Windows NT (MS-SQL?).
    
    David Boerwinkle
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Robert Wagner <rwagner@siac.com>
    To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
    Cc: squires@com.net <squires@com.net>
    Date: Wednesday, January 12, 2000 9:56 AM
    Subject: [GENERAL] identifying performance hits: how to ???
    
    
    >Hello All,
    >
    >Anyone know if read performance on a postgres database decreases at an
    >increasing rate, as the number of stored records increase?
    >
    >This is a TCL app, which makes entries into a single, table and from time
    >to time repopulates a grid control.  It must rebuild the data in the grid
    >control, because other clients have since written to the same table.
    >
    >It seems as if I'm missing something fundamental... maybe I am... is some
    >kind of database cleanup necessary?   With less than ten records, the grid
    >populates very quickly.  Beyond that, performance slows to a crawl, until
    >it _seems_ that every new record doubles the time needed to retrieve the
    >records.  My quick fix was to cache the data locally in TCL, and only
    >retrieve changed data from the database.  But now as client demand
    >increases, as well as the number of clients making changes to the table,
    >I'm reaching the bottleneck again.
    >
    >The client asked me yesterday to start evaluating "more mainstream"
    >databases, which means that they're pissed off.  Postgres is fun to work
    >with, but it's hard to learn about, and hard to justify to clients.
    >
    >By the way, I have experimented with populating the exact same grid control
    >on Windows NT, using MS Access (TCL runs just about anywhere).  The grid
    >seemed to populate just about instantaneously.  So, is the bottleneck in
    >Unix, in Postgres, and does anybody know how to make it faster?
    >
    >Cheers,
    >Rob
    >
    >
    >
    >************
    >