Re: Sort time
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sort time |
Дата | |
Msg-id | web-1827471@davinci.ethosmedia.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Sort time (pginfo <pginfo@t1.unisoftbg.com>) |
Ответы |
ANALYZE and indexes (was Re: Sort time)
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Pginfo, > Sort (cost=100922.53..100922.53 rows=22330 width=215) (actual > time=109786.23..110231.74 rows=679743 loops=1) > -> Hash Join (cost=9153.28..99309.52 rows=22330 width=215) > (actual > time=12572.01..56330.28 rows=679743 loops=1) > -> Hash Join (cost=2271.05..91995.05 rows=30620 width=198) > (actual > time=7082.66..36482.57 rows=679743 loops=1) > -> Seq Scan on a_sklad s (cost=0.00..84181.91 > rows=687913 > width=111) (actual time=6812.81..23085.36 rows=679743 loops=1) > -> Hash (cost=2256.59..2256.59 rows=5784 width=87) > (actual > time=268.05..268.05 rows=0 loops=1) > -> Hash Join (cost=2.52..2256.59 rows=5784 > width=87) > (actual time=125.25..255.48 rows=5784 loops=1) > -> Seq Scan on a_nomen n > (cost=0.00..2152.84 > rows=5784 width=74) (actual time=120.63..216.93 rows=5784 loops=1) > -> Hash (cost=2.42..2.42 rows=42 > width=13) > (actual time=0.57..0.57 rows=0 loops=1) > -> Seq Scan on a_med med > (cost=0.00..2.42 > rows=42 width=13) (actual time=0.24..0.46 rows=42 loops=1) > -> Hash (cost=6605.19..6605.19 rows=110819 width=17) > (actual > time=5485.90..5485.90 rows=0 loops=1) > -> Seq Scan on a_doc d (cost=0.00..6605.19 > rows=110819 > width=17) (actual time=61.18..5282.99 rows=109788 loops=1) > Total runtime: 110856.36 msec Pardon me if we've been over this ground, but that's a *lot* of seq scans for this query. It seems odd that there's not *one* index scan. Have you tried indexing *all* of the following fields? S.FID N.OSN_MED S.IDS_NUM N.IDS S.IDS_DOC D.IDS (check to avoid duplicate indexes. don't forget to VACUUM ANALYZE after you index) -Josh Berkus
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: