Re: reading EXPLAIN output
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: reading EXPLAIN output |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24368.1135276205@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | reading EXPLAIN output (David Rysdam <drysdam@ll.mit.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: reading EXPLAIN output
|
Список | pgsql-general |
David Rysdam <drysdam@ll.mit.edu> writes: > merge join (cost=0.00..348650.65 rows=901849 width=12) > merge cond {blah} > join filter {blah} > index scan using {blah index on blah} (cost=0.00..289740.65 > rows=11259514 width=8) > index scan using {blah index on blah} (cost=0.00..17229.93 > rows=902085 width=8) > This query takes about 3 minutes to run and I'm trying to figure out > why. From a tutorial and the docs, I gather that the "..largenum" part > is the number of page reads required, so I understand where 289740 and > 17229 come from. But what about 348650 page reads for the "merge > join"? You're misreading it. An upper node's cost includes the cost of its children. So the actual cost estimate for the join step is 41680.07. > When I do EXPLAIN ANALYZE, the actual values come out like this: > merge join: (actual time=170029.404..170029.404) That seems a bit odd ... is there only one row produced? Could you show us the entire EXPLAIN ANALYZE output, rather than your assumptions about what's important? Increasing work_mem won't help a merge join, but if you can get it large enough to allow a hash join to be used instead, that might be a win. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: