Re: Query speed problems
От | Stephan Szabo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Query speed problems |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20030417140458.Q92220-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Query speed problems (Victor Danilchenko <danilche@cs.umass.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, 17 Apr 2003, Victor Danilchenko wrote: > Unique (cost=230.58..255.24 rows=123 width=171) (actual > time=238.20..293.21 rows=128 loops=1) > -> Sort (cost=230.58..233.66 rows=1233 width=171) (actual > time=238.19..241.07 rows=1233 loops=1) > Sort Key: maker.id, maker.fullname, maker.contact, > maker.phone, maker.service_no, maker.lastuser, maker.comments > -> Merge Join (cost=0.00..167.28 rows=1233 width=171) (actual > time=0.27..81.49 rows=1233 loops=1) > Merge Cond: ("outer".id = "inner".maker) > -> Index Scan using maker_pkey on maker > (cost=0.00..52.00 rows=1000 width=164) (actual time=0.11..4.29 > rows=137 loops=1) > -> Index Scan using makers on model (cost=0.00..94.28 > rows=1233 width=7) (actual time=0.04..27.34 rows=1233 loops=1) > Total runtime: 295.30 msec > (8 rows) Hmm, well, for this version, it looks like most of the time is probably going into the sort. I wonder if raising sort_mem would help this version of the query (try a set sort_mem=8192; before running the query). This isn't likely to get the time below like 160 msec though. > Following a suggestion sent in private mail, I have created an > index for model.maker column: > > # create index model_maker on model(maker); > > but that doesn't seem to have made an appreciable difference in > performance -- it's only about .05 seconds more than the above number if > I drop the index. Yeah, it looks like it's already using an index, but I didn't see that index in the list of indexes on the table in the original mail, wierd.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: