Re: potential performance gain by query planner optimization

"Kneringer, Armin" <Armin.Kneringer@fabasoft.com> writes:
> I think I found a potential performance gain if the query planner would be optimized. All Tests has been performed
with8.4.1 (and earlier versions) on CentOS 5.3 (x64) 

> The following query will run on my database (~250 GB) for ca. 1600 seconds and the sort will result in a disk merge
deployingca. 200 GB of data to the local disk (ca. 180.000 tmp-files) 

What have you got work_mem set to?  It looks like you must be using an
unreasonably large value, else the planner wouldn't have tried to use a
hash join here:

>                      ->  Hash  (cost=11917516.57..11917516.57 rows=55006045159 width=16)
>                            ->  Nested Loop  (cost=0.00..11917516.57 rows=55006045159 width=16)
>                                  ->  Seq Scan on atdateval t5  (cost=0.00...294152.40 rows=1859934 width=12)
>                                        Filter: (attrid = 281479288456447::bigint)
>                                  ->  Index Scan using ind_ataggval on ataggval q1_1  (cost=0.00..6.20 rows=4
width=12)
>                                        Index Cond: ((q1_1.attrid = 281479288456451::bigint) AND (q1_1.aggval =
t5.aggrid))
>                                        Filter: (q1_1.aggrid = 0)

Also, please try something newer than 8.4.1 --- this might be some
already-fixed bug.

            regards, tom lane