Re: [HACKERS] why is postgres estimating so badly?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] why is postgres estimating so badly? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 15637.1026927830@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | why is postgres estimating so badly? ("Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro" <lamigo@atc.unican.es>) |
Список | pgsql-sql |
"Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro" <lamigo@atc.unican.es> writes: > -> Seq Scan on part (cost=0.00..12399.00 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=24.88..4076.81 rows=10856 loops=1) Seems like the major misestimation is above: the LIKE clause on part is estimated to select just one row, but it selects 10856 of 'em. Had the planner realized the number of returned rows would be in the thousands, it'd likely have used quite a different plan structure. > AND part.name LIKE '%green%' It's difficult for the planner to produce a decent estimate for the selectivity of an unanchored LIKE clause, since there are no statistics it can use for the purpose. We recently changed FIXED_CHAR_SEL in src/backend/utils/adt/selfuncs.c from 0.04 to 0.20, which would make this particular case come out better. (I believe the estimate would work out to about 320, if part is 200K rows; that should be enough to produce at least some change of plan.) You could try patching your local installation likewise. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: