pg.ddx.io pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive help / color / mirror / Atom feed From: Alex Ignatov <a.ignatov@postgrespro.ru>
To: Bertrand Paquet <bertrand.paquet@doctolib.fr>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Query planner wants to use seq scan
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 14:30:45 +0300
Message-ID: <562F6065.7030204@postgrespro.ru> (raw )
In-Reply-To: <CAN1xZsdnOh1qNQztqF3J_ctEZNkQMqdcLGaXAuvtJ6-7nKfxJw@mail.gmail.com >
References: <CAN1xZsc3LG3gV4j+x0Uhsh4e2Xjf1HEuAT7CnBNNPUCTXwYZhg@mail.gmail.com >
<562F5B41.7060603@postgrespro.ru >
<CAN1xZsdC5xyXgTZKn1rkczFGqOnid2xZ4b1zq_VB99+2RmyH5Q@mail.gmail.com >
<562F5D66.5010305@postgrespro.ru >
<CAN1xZsdnOh1qNQztqF3J_ctEZNkQMqdcLGaXAuvtJ6-7nKfxJw@mail.gmail.com >
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
On 27.10.2015 14:19, Bertrand Paquet wrote:
>
> relname | n_live_tup | n_dead_tup |
> last_vacuum | last_autovacuum | last_analyze
> | last_autoanalyze
>
> ------------------------+------------+------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------------
>
> external_sync_messages | 998105 | 11750 | 2015-10-26
> 20:15:17.484771+00 | 2015-10-02 15:04:25.944479+00 | 2015-10-26
> 20:15:19.465308+00 | 2015-10-22 12:24:26.947616+00
>
> (1 row)
>
>
> 2015-10-27 12:17 GMT+01:00 Alex Ignatov <a.ignatov@postgrespro.ru
> <mailto:a.ignatov@postgrespro.ru>>:
>
> On 27.10.2015 14:10, Bertrand Paquet wrote:
>> Yes, I have run VACUUM ANALYZE, no effect.
>>
>> Bertrand
>>
>> 2015-10-27 12:08 GMT+01:00 Alex Ignatov <a.ignatov@postgrespro.ru
>> <mailto:a.ignatov@postgrespro.ru>>:
>>
>> On 27.10.2015 12:35, Bertrand Paquet wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We have a slow query. After analyzing, the planner
>> decision seems to be discutable : the query is faster
>> when disabling seqscan. See below the two query plan, and
>> an extract from pg_stats.
>>
>> Any idea about what to change to help the planner ?
>>
>> An information which can be useful : the number on
>> distinct value on organization_id is very very low, may
>> be the planner does not known that, and take the wrong
>> decision.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Bertrand
>>
>> # explain analyze SELECT 1 AS one FROM
>> "external_sync_messages" WHERE
>> "external_sync_messages"."organization_id" = 1612 AND
>> ("external_sync_messages"."status" NOT IN
>> ('sent_to_proxy', 'in_progress', 'ok')) AND
>> "external_sync_messages"."handled_by" IS NULL LIMIT 1;
>>
>> QUERY PLAN
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Limit (cost=0.00..12.39 rows=1 width=0) (actual
>> time=232.212..232.213 rows=1 loops=1)
>>
>> -> Seq Scan on external_sync_messages
>> (cost=0.00..79104.69 rows=6385 width=0) (actual
>> time=232.209..232.209 rows=1 loops=1)
>>
>> Filter: ((handled_by IS NULL) AND
>> (organization_id = 1612) AND ((status)::text <> ALL
>> ('{sent_to_proxy,in_progress,ok}'::text[])))
>>
>> Rows Removed by Filter: 600140
>>
>> Planning time: 0.490 ms
>>
>> Execution time: 232.246 ms
>>
>> (6 rows)
>>
>> # set enable_seqscan = off;
>>
>> SET
>>
>> # explain analyze SELECT 1 AS one FROM
>> "external_sync_messages" WHERE
>> "external_sync_messages"."organization_id" = 1612 AND
>> ("external_sync_messages"."status" NOT IN
>> ('sent_to_proxy', 'in_progress', 'ok')) AND
>> "external_sync_messages"."handled_by" IS NULL LIMIT 1;
>>
>> QUERY PLAN
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Limit (cost=0.42..39.88 rows=1 width=0) (actual
>> time=0.030..0.030 rows=1 loops=1)
>>
>> -> Index Scan using
>> index_external_sync_messages_on_organization_id on
>> external_sync_messages (cost=0.42..251934.05 rows=6385
>> width=0) (actual time=0.028..0.028 rows=1 loops=1)
>>
>> Index Cond: (organization_id = 1612)
>>
>> Filter: ((handled_by IS NULL) AND
>> ((status)::text <> ALL
>> ('{sent_to_proxy,in_progress,ok}'::text[])))
>>
>> Planning time: 0.103 ms
>>
>> Execution time: 0.052 ms
>>
>> (6 rows)
>>
>> # SELECT attname, inherited, n_distinct,
>> array_to_string(most_common_vals, E'\n') as
>> most_common_vals FROM pg_stats WHERE tablename =
>> 'external_sync_messages' and attname IN ('status',
>> 'organization_id', 'handled_by');
>>
>> attname | inherited | n_distinct | most_common_vals
>>
>> -----------------+-----------+------------+------------------
>>
>> handled_by | f | 3 | 3 +
>>
>> | | | 236140 +
>>
>> | | | 54413
>>
>> organization_id | f | 22 | 1612 +
>>
>> | | | 287 +
>>
>> | | | 967 +
>>
>> | | | 1223 +
>>
>> | | | 1123 +
>>
>> | | | 1930 +
>>
>> | | | 841 +
>>
>> | | | 1814 +
>>
>> | | | 711 +
>>
>> | | | 1513 +
>>
>> | | | 1794 +
>>
>> | | | 1246 +
>>
>> | | | 1673 +
>>
>> | | | 1552 +
>>
>> | | | 1747 +
>>
>> | | | 2611 +
>>
>> | | | 2217 +
>>
>> | | | 2448 +
>>
>> | | | 2133 +
>>
>> | | | 1861 +
>>
>> | | | 2616 +
>>
>> | | | 2796
>>
>> status | f | 6 | ok +
>>
>> | | | ignored +
>>
>> | | | channel_error +
>>
>> | | | in_progress +
>>
>> | | | error +
>>
>> | | | sent_to_proxy
>>
>> (3 rows)
>>
>> # select count(*) from external_sync_messages;
>>
>> count
>>
>> --------
>>
>> 992912
>>
>> (1 row)
>>
>>
>> Hello, Bertrand!
>> May be statistics on external_sync_messages is wrong? i.e
>> planner give us rows=6385 but seq scan give us Rows Removed
>> by Filter: 600140
>> Maybe you should recalc it by VACUUM ANALYZE it?
>>
>> --
>> Alex Ignatov
>> Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
>> The Russian Postgres Company
>>
>>
> What is the result of
> select relname,n_live_tup,n_dead_tup, last_vacuum,
> last_autovacuum, last_analyze, last_autoanalyze from
> pg_stat_user_tables where relname='external_sync_messages' ?
>
> --
> Alex Ignatov
> Postgres Professional:http://www.postgrespro.com
> The Russian Postgres Company
>
>
What is yours random_page_cost parameter in postgres config?
--
Alex Ignatov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
view thread (14+ messages) latest in thread
Message-ID: <562F6065.7030204@postgrespro.ru>
Permalink: ../562F6065.7030204@postgrespro.ru/
Also on: postgresql.org/message-id/562F6065.7030204@postgrespro.ru
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: a.ignatov@postgrespro.ru, bertrand.paquet@doctolib.fr
Subject: Re: Query planner wants to use seq scan
In-Reply-To: <562F6065.7030204@postgrespro.ru>
* 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