SQL/Python question -- slow... What is the fixed cost?
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
ignacio at openservices.net
Thu Oct 4 20:13:09 EDT 2001
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Thu Oct 4 20:13:09 EDT 2001
- Previous message (by thread): SQL/Python question -- slow... What is the fixed cost?
- Next message (by thread): SQL/Python question -- slow... What is the fixed cost?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Leonardo B Lopes wrote: > Me DB is in 3NF. And I know that 83K isn't that big, but it is big > enough to make a query last .0008 cpusec. when joined w/ 2 other tables > (That is the actual amount, before rounding). The problem is that a > query on a table with only 12 items also takes about the same time. So I > need to know how much time the library is using for data checking, > network connection, etc... Speaking of which, what happens if you use MySQL's socket instead of TCP/IP? > > [snip] > > Apparently, .0004 is a Lower Bound on how fast a query can be, and that > is not good news for me. Yeah, but you've still only tested with a single client. > > [snip] > > So even with a temporary table always in memory, the overhead hasn't > changed much. Comments? MySQL is pretty good at keeping the relevant data in memory, so there shouldn't be much if any gain that way. -- Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ignacio at openservices.net>
- Previous message (by thread): SQL/Python question -- slow... What is the fixed cost?
- Next message (by thread): SQL/Python question -- slow... What is the fixed cost?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list