From: Pepe Barbe <elventear@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Join performance
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 16:47:09 -0600
Message-ID: <2ACEBABD-7853-475B-B8C0-91B654AF143D@gmail.com> (raw)
Hello,
I am having an issue on PostgreSQL 8.0.12. In the past we had
performance issues with the query planner for queries on some tables
where we knew we had indexes and it was doing a sequential scan, and
for this reason we issue "SET enable_seqscan = FALSE" for some queries.
Recently we have stumbled upon one of these kind of queries that is
giving terrible performance, because seqscan is disabled. I've reduced
the problem to a a command like this one:
SELECT * from gsm_sector_metrics NATURAL JOIN gsm_amr_metrics INNER
JOIN temp_busy_hr USING(start_time,bsc_id,sect_id);
Where temp_busy_hr is a temporary table.
If the previous is issued with seqscan TRUE, it runs within reasonable
time, else it runs for ever. The query plan for the previous query
with enable_seqscan = TRUE:
QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit (cost=0.00..384555.98 rows=1 width=3092)
-> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..384555.98 rows=1 width=3092)
Join Filter: (("inner".bsc_id = "outer".bsc_id) AND
("inner".site_id = "outer".site_id) AND ("inner".sect_id =
"outer".sect_id))
-> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..368645.64 rows=28 width=1192)
Join Filter: (("outer".sect_id = "inner".sect_id) AND
("outer".bsc_id = "inner".bsc_id))
-> Seq Scan on temp_busy_hr (cost=0.00..24.00
rows=1400 width=24)
-> Index Scan using gsm_amr_start_time_idx on
gsm_amr_metrics (cost=0.00..226.66 rows=2094 width=1168)
Index Cond: ("outer".start_time =
gsm_amr_metrics.start_time)
-> Index Scan using gsm_sector_start_time_idx on
gsm_sector_metrics t1 (cost=0.00..528.77 rows=1973 width=1936)
Index Cond: (t1.start_time = "outer".start_time)
(10 rows)
and the plan for enable_seqscan = FALSE:
QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit (cost=100000097.16.. 100720844.011111 rows=1 width=3092)
-> Nested Loop (cost=100000097.16..100720844.01 rows=1 width=3092)
Join Filter: (("inner".bsc_id = "outer".bsc_id) AND
("inner".site_id = "outer".site_id) AND ("inner".sect_id =
"outer".sect_id))
-> Merge Join (cost=100000097.16..100704933.67 rows=28
width=1192)
Merge Cond: ("outer".start_time = "inner".start_time)
Join Filter: (("inner".sect_id = "outer".sect_id) AND
("inner".bsc_id = "outer".bsc_id))
-> Index Scan using gsm_amr_start_time_idx on
gsm_amr_metrics (cost=0.00..631211.45 rows=6005551 width=1168)
-> Sort (cost=100000097.16..100000100.66 rows=1400
width=24)
Sort Key: temp_busy_hr.start_time
-> Seq Scan on temp_busy_hr
(cost=100000000.00..100000024.00 rows=1400 width=24)
-> Index Scan using gsm_sector_start_time_idx on
gsm_sector_metrics t1 (cost=0.00..528.77 rows=1973 width=1936)
Index Cond: (t1.start_time = "outer".start_time)
(12 rows)
Any ideas what could I try to fix this problem?
Thanks,
Pepe
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: elventear@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Join performance
In-Reply-To: <2ACEBABD-7853-475B-B8C0-91B654AF143D@gmail.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