Re: Unexpected expensive index scan

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jim Nasby
Тема Re: Unexpected expensive index scan
Дата
Msg-id 7abde325-3452-a1e1-e288-ee33408d7708@BlueTreble.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Unexpected expensive index scan  (Jake Nielsen <jake.k.nielsen@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
On 9/28/16 1:11 PM, Jake Nielsen wrote:
> Beautiful! After changing the random_page_cost to 1.0 the original query
> went from ~3.5s to ~35ms. This is exactly the kind of insight I was
> fishing for in the original post. I'll keep in mind that the query
> planner is very tunable and has these sorts of hardware-related
> trade-offs in the future. I can't thank you enough!

Be careful with setting random_page_cost to exactly 1... that tells the
planner that an index scan has nearly the same cost as a sequential
scan, which is absolutely never the case, even with the database in
memory. 1.1 or maybe even 1.01 is probably a safer bet.

Also note that you can set those parameters within a single session, as
well as within a single transaction. So if you need to force a different
setting for a single query, you could always do

BEGIN;
SET LOCAL random_page_cost = 1;
SELECT ...
COMMIT; (or rollback...)
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)   mobile: 512-569-9461


В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Joe Proietti
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: MYSQL Stats
Следующее
От: Jim Nasby
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Millions of tables