From: Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au>
To: Sylvain CAILLET <scaillet@alaloop.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Slow Delete : Seq scan instead of index scan
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 16:09:21 +0800
Message-ID: <507D1631.9050904@ringerc.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1837771448.3789694.1350373812378.JavaMail.root@alaloop.com>
References: <1837771448.3789694.1350373812378.JavaMail.root@alaloop.com>
On 10/16/2012 03:50 PM, Sylvain CAILLET wrote:
> Hi to all,
>
> I've got a trouble with some delete statements. My db contains a little
> more than 10000 tables and runs on a dedicated server (Debian 6 - bi
> quad - 16Gb - SAS disks raid 0). Most of the tables contains between 2
> and 3 million rows and no foreign keys exist between them. Each is
> indexed (btree) on start_date / end_date fields (bigint). The Postgresql
> server has been tuned (I can give modified values if needed).
>
> I perform recurrent DELETE upon a table subset (~1900 tables) and each
> time, I delete a few lines (between 0 and 1200). Usually it takes
> between 10s and more than 2mn. It seems to me to be a huge amount of
> time ! An EXPLAIN ANALYZE on a DELETE shows me that the planner uses a
> Seq Scan instead of an Index Scan.
Can you post that (or paste to explain.depesz.com and link to it here)
along with a "\d tablename" from psql?
--
Craig Ringer
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: ringerc@ringerc.id.au, scaillet@alaloop.com
Subject: Re: Slow Delete : Seq scan instead of index scan
In-Reply-To: <507D1631.9050904@ringerc.id.au>
* 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