pg.ddx.io  pgsql-sql@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rosser Schwarz <rosser.schwarz@gmail.com>
To: Derek Buttineau|Compu-SOLVE <derek@csolve.net>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] ORDER BY Optimization
Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 15:35:30 -0500
Message-ID: <37d451f7050506133534923deb@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <427BCA10.4090208@csolve.net>
References: <427BCA10.4090208@csolve.net>

while you weren't looking, Derek Buttineau|Compu-SOLVE wrote:

> I'm hoping this is the right place to send this.

The PostgreSQL Performance list, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
would be more appropriate. I'm copying my followup there, as well.

As for your query, almost all the time is actually spent in the
nestloop, not the sort.  Compare:

>   ->  Sort  (cost=31402.85..31405.06 rows=886 width=306) (actual
> time=87454.187..87454.240 rows=10 loops=1)

vs.

>          ->  Nested Loop  (cost=0.00..31359.47 rows=886 width=306)
> (actual time=4.740..86430.468 rows=26308 loops=1)

That's 50-ish ms versus 80-odd seconds.

It seems to me a merge join might be more appropriate here than a
nestloop. What's your work_mem set at?  Off-the-cuff numbers show the
dataset weighing in the sub-ten mbyte range.

Provided it's not already at least that big, and you don't want to up
it permanently, try saying:

SET work_mem = 10240; -- 10 mbytes

immediately before running this query (uncached, of course) and see
what happens.

Also, your row-count estimates look pretty off-base.  When were these
tables last VACUUMed or ANALYZEd?

/rls

-- 
:wq



view thread (5+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <37d451f7050506133534923deb@mail.gmail.com>
Permalink:  ../37d451f7050506133534923deb@mail.gmail.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/37d451f7050506133534923deb@mail.gmail.com

 · 

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-sql@postgresql.org
  Cc: rosser.schwarz@gmail.com, derek@csolve.net, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: [SQL] ORDER BY Optimization
  In-Reply-To: <37d451f7050506133534923deb@mail.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