From: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
To: Karl Wright <kwright@metacarta.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:12:05 +0100
Message-ID: <87y7if7wkq.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <873b0o7xrn.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
References: <4676DD57.7070304@metacarta.com>
<14291.1182221811@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<4677B831.8060704@metacarta.com>
<27690.1182263794@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<4677ECA9.3000402@metacarta.com>
<873b0o7xrn.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
"Gregory Stark" <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> "Karl Wright" <kwright@metacarta.com> writes:
>
>>> In this case it looks like the planner is afraid that that's exactly
>>> what will happen --- a cost of 14177 suggests that several thousand row
>>> fetches are expected to happen, and yet it's only predicting 5 rows out
>>> after the filter. It's using this plan anyway because it has no better
>>> alternative, but you should think about whether a different index
>>> definition would help.
>
> Another index won't help if the reason the cost is so high isn't because the
> index isn't very selective but because there are lots of dead tuples.
Sorry, I didn't mean to say that was definitely the case, only that having
bloated tables with lots of dead index pointers could have similar symptoms
because the query still has to follow all those index pointers.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
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: stark@enterprisedb.com, kwright@metacarta.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access
In-Reply-To: <87y7if7wkq.fsf@oxford.xeocode.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