<story><title>Faster DISTINCT queries on PostgreSQL</title><url>https://blog.timescale.com/blog/how-we-made-distinct-queries-up-to-8000x-faster-on-postgresql/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jereze</author><text>I made first tests with Timescale 10 days ago with logs of a website.
First result, I was impressed by the compression: 13GB of compressed CSV files - 1 PostgreSQL table of 63GB - 1 Timescale hypertable of 4GB.
Then, I saw improvements on the performance of my queries, between 23% and 92% faster on the hypertable versus the table.
This is definitely interesting and I will look into it further. I&amp;#x27;m getting from &amp;quot;it&amp;#x27;s not a good idea to put weblogs on Postgresql&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;why not, if it helps simplify our infra&amp;quot;.</text></comment>
<story><title>Faster DISTINCT queries on PostgreSQL</title><url>https://blog.timescale.com/blog/how-we-made-distinct-queries-up-to-8000x-faster-on-postgresql/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>akra</author><text>In the past I found this tip to be helpful: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;wiki.postgresql.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Loose_indexscan&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;wiki.postgresql.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Loose_indexscan&lt;/a&gt;. You can emulate it but it would be good for distinct to do this natively for default fast performance (distinct key queries) to avoid needing to know these tricks of the trade.</text></comment>