pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
To: Tim Jones <TJones@optio.com>
Cc: Dave Dutcher <dave@tridecap.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: joining two tables slow due to sequential scan
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 16:39:19 -0600
Message-ID: <1139611159.22740.149.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47668A1334CDBF46927C1A0DFEB223D3131317@mail.optiosoftware.com>
References: <47668A1334CDBF46927C1A0DFEB223D3131317@mail.optiosoftware.com>

On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 16:37, Tim Jones wrote:
> for first query
> 
> QUERY PLAN
> 'Limit  (cost=4.69..88.47 rows=10 width=1350) (actual
> time=32.195..32.338 rows=10 loops=1)'
> '  ->  Nested Loop  (cost=4.69..4043.09 rows=482 width=1350) (actual
> time=32.190..32.316 rows=10 loops=1)'
> '        ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on documentversions  (cost=4.69..1139.40
> rows=482 width=996) (actual time=32.161..32.171 rows=10 loops=1)'
> '              Recheck Cond: (documentstatus = ''AC''::bpchar)'
> '              ->  Bitmap Index Scan on ix_docstatus  (cost=0.00..4.69
> rows=482 width=0) (actual time=31.467..31.467 rows=96368 loops=1)'
> '                    Index Cond: (documentstatus = ''AC''::bpchar)'
> '        ->  Index Scan using ix_cdocdid on clinicaldocuments
> (cost=0.00..6.01 rows=1 width=354) (actual time=0.006..0.007 rows=1
> loops=10)'
> '              Index Cond: ("outer".documentidentifier =
> clinicaldocuments.dssdocumentidentifier)'
>  
> 
>  for second query
> 
> QUERY PLAN
> 'Hash Join  (cost=899.83..4384.17 rows=482 width=1350)'
> '  Hash Cond: ("outer".documentidentifier =
> "inner".dssdocumentidentifier)'
> '  ->  Seq Scan on documentversions  (cost=0.00..2997.68 rows=96368
> width=996)'
> '  ->  Hash  (cost=898.62..898.62 rows=482 width=354)'
> '        ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on clinicaldocuments  (cost=4.69..898.62
> rows=482 width=354)'
> '              Recheck Cond: (patientidentifier = 123)'
> '              ->  Bitmap Index Scan on ix_cdocpid  (cost=0.00..4.69
> rows=482 width=0)'
> '                    Index Cond: (patientidentifier = 123)'

OK, the first one is explain analyze, but the second one is just plain
explain...

view thread (14+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <1139611159.22740.149.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
Permalink:  ../1139611159.22740.149.camel@state.g2switchworks.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/1139611159.22740.149.camel@state.g2switchworks.com

copy link · copy postgr.es

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
  Cc: smarlowe@g2switchworks.com, TJones@optio.com, dave@tridecap.com
  Subject: Re: joining two tables slow due to sequential scan
  In-Reply-To: <1139611159.22740.149.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox