Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps
 (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-performance-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1psOlO-00023w-NS
	for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:07:54 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-performance-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1psOlN-0000Nk-Kv
	for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:07:53 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1psOlN-0000Mk-AT
	for pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:07:53 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1psOlK-002Mq5-OM
	for pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:07:52 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 33SE7lpO1339837;
	Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:07:47 -0400
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: =?UTF-8?B?zqDOsc+BzrHPg866zrXPhc63IM6gzrHPg8+DzrHPgc63?=
 <passari.paraskevi@gmail.com>
cc: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Performance issues in query with multiple joins
In-reply-to: 
 <CAKcH_XZNmmquh2w8oGtRyT+HyrEeodayaBd1QvcgmR69i=hN0A@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAKcH_XZNmmquh2w8oGtRyT+HyrEeodayaBd1QvcgmR69i=hN0A@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to =?UTF-8?B?zqDOsc+BzrHPg866zrXPhc63IM6gzrHPg8+DzrHPgc63?=
 <passari.paraskevi@gmail.com>
	message dated "Fri, 28 Apr 2023 15:19:21 +0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1339835.1682690867.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:07:47 -0400
Message-ID: <1339836.1682690867@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-performance.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-performance>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1339836.1682690867%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

=3D?UTF-8?B?zqDOsc+BzrHPg866zrXPhc63IM6gzrHPg8+DzrHPgc63?=3D <passari.para=
skevi@gmail.com> writes:
> We are facing a performance issue with the following query. Executing th=
is
> query takes about 20 seconds.

Raising join_collapse_limit (to more than the number of joins in
the query) might help.  But I think really if performance is a
problem you should think about ditching the star schema design.

			regards, tom lane