hanks,
Jay.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Trout
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 6:23 AM
To: Jay Greenfield
Cc: 'Tom Lane'; 'Stephen Frost'; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Postgres sl
> Hmm, the large number of columns might have something to do with it ...
> what datatypes are the columns?
All sorts, but mostly float4 and varchar(2 to 10)
Jay
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 1:03 PM
To: Jay Greenfi
nal Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 12:43 PM
To: Stephen Frost
Cc: Jay Greenfield; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Postgres slower than MS ACCESS
Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While it's true
Greenfield
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Postgres slower than MS ACCESS
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 09:51, Jay Greenfield wrote:
> I am running some simple queries to benchmark Postgres 8.1 against MS
> Access and Postgres is 2 to 3 times slower that Access.
A BUNCH OF
I am running some simple queries to benchmark
Postgres 8.1 against MS Access and Postgres is 2 to 3 times slower that
Access.
Hardware:
Dell Optiplex GX280
P4 3.20 GHz
3GB RAM
Windows XP SP1
Database has one table with 1.2 million rows
Query:
UPDATE ntdn SET gha=area/1000
