I have a table called jobs with ~17 millions records. Without an index on
the queue column, the following query
select count(*) from jobs where lower(queue) = 'normal'
found ~2.6 millions records in 10160ms
With the following index:
create index lower_queue on jobs (lower(queue))
the same query only took 3850ms
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Joshua D. Drake <j...@commandprompt.com>wrote:
>
> On 06/29/2013 09:24 AM, bhanu udaya wrote:
>
> Upper and Lower functions are not right choice when the table is > 2.5
>> million and where we also have heavy insert transactions.
>>
>
> Prove it. Seriously, just run a test case against it. See how it works for
> you. Inserts are generally a very inexpensive operation with Postgres.
>
>
>> I doubt, if we can cache the table if there are frequent
>> inserts/updates. The good idea would be to get the DB to case
>> insenstive configuration like SQL Server. I would go for this solution,
>> if postgres supports.
>>
>
> Postgres does not.
>
> And as Jon said, maybe Postgres isn't the right solution for you. That
> would be a bummer but we can't be all things to all people.
>
>
> JD
>
> --
> Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 509-416-6579
> PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
> High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC, @cmdpromptinc
> For my dreams of your image that blossoms
> a rose in the deeps of my heart. - W.B. Yeats
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgadmin-support mailing list
> (pgadmin-support@postgresql.**org<pgadmin-supp...@postgresql.org>
> )
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/**mailpref/pgadmin-support<http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-support>
>
