Re: 'Interesting' prepared statement slowdown on large table join
От | Jeff Janes |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 'Interesting' prepared statement slowdown on large table join |
Дата | |
Msg-id | BANLkTimWsVv7DgYkur3xJvu29K3x+PDAxw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | 'Interesting' prepared statement slowdown on large table join ("Prodan, Andrei" <Andrei.Prodan@awinta.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: 'Interesting' prepared statement slowdown on large table join
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:08 AM, Prodan, Andrei <Andrei.Prodan@awinta.com> wrote: > ... > > > The select is as follows: > prepare ps(varchar,varchar,varchar) as select party.party_id from party, > big_table where external_id = $1 and party.party_id = big_table.party_id > and attr_name = $2 and attr_value = $3; > PREPARE > execute ps('13','GroupId','testshop'); > > BAD PLAN: > testdb=# explain analyze execute ps('13','GroupId','testshop'); > QUERY ... > -> Index Scan using attr_name_value on big_table (cost=0.00..22.85 > rows=4 width=7) (actual time=0.176..757.646 rows=914786 loops=1) > Index Cond: (((attr_name)::text = ($2)::text) AND > ((attr_value)::text = ($3)::text)) So it expects 4 rows and finds 914786, essentially the whole table. So that is bad. But what is it thinking during the GOOD PLAN state? A possible way to get that information is to prepare a simpler prepared statement that omits the join to party and explain analyze it with the same params for attr_name and attr_value. If that gives you the full table scan rather than index scan, then you can "set enable_seqscan=off" try to force the index scan. Cheers, Jeff
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: