Re: Specific query performance problem help requested - postgresql 7.4
От | Brad Might |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Specific query performance problem help requested - postgresql 7.4 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | E387E2E9622FDD408359F98BF183879E08DC02@dc1.storediq.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Specific query performance problem help requested - postgresql 7.4 ("Brad Might" <bmight@storediq.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
How is it that the index scan has such poor performance? Shouldn't index lookups be quicker? -----Original Message----- From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 1:32 PM To: Brad Might Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Specific query performance problem help requested - postgresql 7.4 "Brad Might" <bmight@storediq.com> writes: > Can someone help me break this down and figure out why the one query > takes so much longer than the other? It looks to me like there's a correlation between filename and bucket, such that the indexscan in filename order takes much longer to run across the first 25 rows with bucket = 3 than it does to run across the first 25 with bucket = 7 or bucket = 8. It's not just a matter of there being fewer rows with bucket = 3 ... the cost differential is much larger than is explained by the count ratios. The bucket = 3 rows have to be lurking further to the back of the filename order than the others. > Here's the bucket distribution..i have clustered the index on the > bucket value. If you have an index on bucket, it's not doing you any good here anyway, since you wrote the constraint as a crosstype operator ("3" is int4 not int8). It might help to explicitly cast the constant to int8. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: