Re: planer chooses very bad plan
От | Corin |
---|---|
Тема | Re: planer chooses very bad plan |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4BC2500F.5000306@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: planer chooses very bad plan (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: planer chooses very bad plan
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 11.04.2010 23:18, Scott Marlowe wrote: > In both instances your number of rows estimated is WAY higher than the > actual number of rows returned. Perhaps if you increased > default_statistics_target to 100, 200, 500 etc. re-analyzed, and then > reun explain analyze again. > > Also increasing work_mem might encourage the bitmap index scans to occur. > Increasing the statistics >= 500 indeed helped a lot and causes the planner to choose a good plan. :) I'm now thinking about increasing the default_statistics_target of the whole server from the default (100) to 1000, because I have many tables with similar data. As the size of the table index seems not change at all, I wonder how much additional storage is needed? I only care about runtime performance: are inserts/updates affected by this change? Or is only analyze affected (only run once during the night)? Thanks, Corin
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: