Re: Is there any good optimization solution to improve the query efficiency?
От | David Rowley |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is there any good optimization solution to improve the query efficiency? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAApHDvro3ggJSxMOa_=T0=jDOMpVqs5gfDa6JmWegKSBkJ3g=w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Is there any good optimization solution to improve the query efficiency? (gzh <gzhcoder@126.com>) |
Ответы |
Re:Re: Is there any good optimization solution to improve the query efficiency?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 at 18:56, gzh <gzhcoder@126.com> wrote: > I'm running into some performance issues with my SQL query. > The following SQL query is taking a long time to execute. > -> Hash Join (cost=253388.44..394112.07 rows=1 width=56) (actual time=1197.484..2954.084 rows=330111 loops=1) > Hash Cond: ((T_CUST.RSNO = T_CUST_1.RSNO) AND ((T_CUST.KNO)::text = (T_CUST_1.KNO)::text) AND (T_CUST.gstseq= (min(T_CUST_1.gstseq)))) > -> Seq Scan on TBL_CUST T_CUST (cost=0.00..79431.15 rows=2000315 width=61) (actual time=0.015..561.005rows=2000752 loops=1) > -> Hash (cost=246230.90..246230.90 rows=262488 width=50) (actual time=1197.025..1209.957 rows=330111 loops=1) The above join's selectivity estimation seems to be causing an upper join to resort to performing a Nested Loop join because the planner thinks the join will only produce 1 row. Unfortunately, extended statistics only help for base relation estimations and do nothing for join estimations, so your best bet might be to just: SET enable_nestloop TO off; for this query. David
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: