Re: NL Join vs Merge Join - 5 hours vs 2 seconds

"Kumar, Virendra" <Virendra.Kumar@guycarp.com> writes:
> We are using Postgers-XL based on PostgreSQL 10.5 on RHEL7. We have an extreme case of one query which running in 4
hour45 mins and 33 seconds with Nested Loops Join vs 2.5 seconds when we disable enable_nestloop. The query is given
below.I would be happy to share more information if required. 

It looks like what's burning you is bad estimates at these joins:

>                                        ->  Nested Loop  (cost=33681.00..71431.33 rows=1 width=348) (actual
time=359.006..926.303rows=37207 loops=3) 
>                                              Join Filter: (se.account_id = a.account_id)
>                                              ->  Hash Join  (cost=33680.71..71298.94 rows=395 width=300) (actual
time=358.953..656.923rows=36828 loops=3) 
>                                                    Hash Cond: ((se.account_id = sh.account_id) AND (se.site_id =
sh.site_id))
...
>                                              ->  Index Scan using account_p1000013_account_id_idx on account_p1000013
a (cost=0.29..0.32 rows=1 width=52) (actual time=0.003..0.005 rows=1 loops=110485) 
>                                                    Index Cond: (account_id = sh.account_id)
>                                                    Filter: (portfolio_id = 1000013)

I'm guessing that account_id, site_id, and portfolio_id are all highly
correlated, but the planner doesn't know that and thinks the additional
conditions will remove way more rows than they actually do.

In PG10 and later, you can probably fix that by creating
functional-dependency statistics on those pairs of columns.

            regards, tom lane