Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 18:23:07 +0100
From: Andreas Kretschmer <akretschmer@spamfence.net>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Materialized view performance problems
Message-ID: <20160106172307.GA7532@tux>
References: 
 <CA+dBN5Osf7gmZ0Nb4ENP5mdNU1za3m5Z4W2jPoVYPemqDH2ZbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <573633884.42831.1452080416423.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxweb01.ims-firmen.de>
 <CA+dBN5OM45poaFtDzp6j6UHsbD1ZH7H_SeWx6Vz+HewJLVL-QA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+dBN5OM45poaFtDzp6j6UHsbD1ZH7H_SeWx6Vz+HewJLVL-QA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

Tom McLoughlin <tom@dynamiccreative.com> wrote:

> Thank you very much for your help.
> 
> It's difficult for me to run analyse explain for the query given because it
> takes so long. However, the query below has a similar structure but has less
> data to process.

Seems okay, but it's better to analyse that for the real query. You can
install the auto_explain - module and enable auto_explain.log_analyze
and set auto_explain.log_min_duration to a proper value.

You can find later the explain analse - ouput in the log.

Consider all steps mit seq-scans, but as i see all seq-scan are on small
tables and the majority of rows are in the result, so an index can't
help much.


Andreas
-- 
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely
unintentional side effect.                              (Linus Torvalds)
"If I was god, I would recompile penguin with --enable-fly."   (unknown)
Kaufbach, Saxony, Germany, Europe.              N 51.05082°, E 13.56889°


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance