From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: CG <cgg007@yahoo.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Nested loops are killing throughput
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 14:17:52 -0400
Message-ID: <15195.1158689872@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060919180506.16876.qmail@web37903.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20060919180506.16876.qmail@web37903.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
CG <cgg007@yahoo.com> writes:
> I'm still getting the nested loop for a join.
> Nested Loop (cost=100000000.00..100013378.98 rows=2206 width=145) (actual time=46.743..18202.318 rows=2225 loops=1)
> -> Index Scan using packet_user_idx on packet dp (cost=0.00..88.03 rows=2206 width=125) (actual time=42.263..124.519 rows=2225 loops=1)
> Index Cond: ((username)::text = 'joeuser'::text)
> -> Index Scan using packet_status_puuid_pkey on packet_status dps (cost=0.00..6.01 rows=1 width=20) (actual time=8.115..8.117 rows=1 loops=2225)
> Index Cond: ("outer".packet_uuid = dps.packet_uuid)
> Total runtime: 18205.880 ms
If packet_status is large, that seems like a perfectly reasonable plan
to me. If not ... what data type is packet_uuid? Is its equality op
marked mergeable or hashable?
regards, tom lane
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, cgg007@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Nested loops are killing throughput
In-Reply-To: <15195.1158689872@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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