Re: Perplexing Query Performance

mdklatt@ou.edu (Michael Klatt) wrote in message news:<2cb75565.0204151456.193bde9@posting.google.com>...
> mdklatt@ou.edu (Michael Klatt) wrote in message news:<2cb75565.0204051614.4ad76291@posting.google.com>...
> Consider this query:
>
> select *
> from daily_rainfall as p, sites as s
> where p.site = s.ident and s.latitude >= -90 and s.latitude <= 90 and
>   s.longitude >= -180 and s.terrain in ('A', 'I', 'L');
>
> Almost any combination of 'A', 'I', and/or 'L' consistently executes
> in the same time, but if it's ONLY 'A' PostgreSQL seems to go off into
> Never Never Land.  There is no problem if 'I' or 'L' is used alone,
> just 'A'.
>

Here's some additional information to help diagnose the problem.


This is a "normal" query that executes in a reasonable amount of time.

SRDC=> explain select * from daily_rainfall as p, sites as s where
p.site = s.ident and s.latitude >= -90 and s.latitude <= 90 and
s.longitude >= -180 and s.longitude <= 180 and s.terrain in ('A', 'L',
'I');
NOTICE:  QUERY PLAN:

Nested Loop  (cost=99752.84..183759.80 rows=752 width=100)
  ->  Subquery Scan p  (cost=99752.84..104595.25 rows=38739 width=44)
        ->  Aggregate  (cost=99752.84..104595.25 rows=38739 width=44)
              ->  Group  (cost=99752.84..101689.80 rows=387392
width=44)
                    ->  Sort  (cost=99752.84..99752.84 rows=387392
width=44)
                          ->  Seq Scan on rainfall
(cost=0.00..35636.20 rows=387392 width=44)
  ->  Index Scan using sites_pkey on sites s  (cost=0.00..2.03 rows=1
width=56)

EXPLAIN


This is the query that keeps going and going and going....

SRDC=> explain select * from daily_rainfall as p, sites as s where
p.site = s.ident and s.latitude >= -90 and s.latitude <= 90 and
s.longitude >= -180 and s.longitude <= 180 and s.terrain in ('A');
NOTICE:  QUERY PLAN:

Nested Loop  (cost=99752.84..105094.23 rows=89 width=100)
  ->  Seq Scan on sites s  (cost=0.00..14.74 rows=1 width=56)
  ->  Subquery Scan p  (cost=99752.84..104595.25 rows=38739 width=44)
        ->  Aggregate  (cost=99752.84..104595.25 rows=38739 width=44)
              ->  Group  (cost=99752.84..101689.80 rows=387392
width=44)
                    ->  Sort  (cost=99752.84..99752.84 rows=387392
width=44)
                          ->  Seq Scan on rainfall
(cost=0.00..35636.20 rows=387392 width=44)

EXPLAIN


One difference I see is that the first query does an index scan on
table 'sites', whereas the second query does not.  The only index on
'sites' is the primary key index with on attribute 'ident'.  Would
performance improve if I added an index on 'terrain'?  Attributes
'latitude' and 'longitude' are always used as selection criteria so
should I add indexes to them as well?