Re: Can the V7.3 EXPLAIN ANALYZE be trusted?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Can the V7.3 EXPLAIN ANALYZE be trusted? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 17152.1107729965@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Can the V7.3 EXPLAIN ANALYZE be trusted? ("Leeuw van der, Tim" <tim.leeuwvander@nl.unisys.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Can the V7.3 EXPLAIN ANALYZE be trusted?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
> From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Steven Rosenstein > >> I don't think EXPLAIN ANALYZE puts that much overhead on a query. I think you're being overly optimistic. The explain shows that the Materialize subnode is being entered upwards of 32 million times: -> Materialize (cost=505.06..511.38 rows=632 width=4) (actual time=0.00..0.02 rows=43 loops=752066) 43 * 752066 = 32338838. The instrumentation overhead is basically two gettimeofday() kernel calls per node entry. Doing the math shows that your machine is able to do gettimeofday() in about half a microsecond, which isn't stellar but it's not all that slow for a kernel call. (What's the platform here, anyway?) Nonetheless it's a couple of times larger than the actual time needed to pull a row from a materialized array ... The real answer to your question is "IN (subselect) sucks before PG 7.4; get a newer release". regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: