Re: LIMIT confuses the planner

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Kouber Saparev
Тема Re: LIMIT confuses the planner
Дата
Msg-id 49C8BB68.9050004@saparev.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: LIMIT confuses the planner  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-performance
Now I am experiencing similar issue with another table, called
"message", for which there's a conditional index:

CREATE TABLE message (
   message_sid SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
   from_profile_sid INT NOT NULL REFERENCES profile,
   to_profile_sid INT NOT NULL REFERENCES profile,
   sender_has_deleted BOOLEAN NOT NULL DEFAULT FALSE,
   receiver_has_deleted BOOLEAN NOT NULL DEFAULT FALSE,
   datetime TIMESTAMP NOT NULL DEFAULT NOW(),
   body TEXT
);

CREATE INDEX message_from_profile_idx (from_profile_sid) WHERE NOT
sender_has_deleted;


So, again... adding a LIMIT makes the planner choose the "wrong" index.


db=# EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT
          message_sid
FROM
   message
WHERE
   from_profile_sid = 1296 AND NOT sender_has_deleted
ORDER BY
   message_sid DESC;
                                                                 QUERY PLAN

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Sort  (cost=2307.70..2310.74 rows=1215 width=4) (actual
time=0.040..0.040 rows=2 loops=1)
    Sort Key: message_sid
    Sort Method:  quicksort  Memory: 25kB
    ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on message  (cost=23.59..2245.45 rows=1215
width=4) (actual time=0.029..0.033 rows=2 loops=1)
          Recheck Cond: ((from_profile_sid = 1296) AND (NOT
sender_has_deleted))
          ->  Bitmap Index Scan on message_from_profile_idx
(cost=0.00..23.28 rows=1215 width=0) (actual time=0.022..0.022 rows=2
loops=1)
                Index Cond: (from_profile_sid = 1296)
  Total runtime: 0.068 ms
(8 rows)




db=# EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT
   message_sid
FROM
   message
WHERE
   from_profile_sid = 1296 AND NOT sender_has_deleted
ORDER BY
   message_sid DESC LIMIT 20;
                                                                   QUERY
PLAN

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Limit  (cost=0.00..1461.12 rows=20 width=4) (actual
time=0.817..932.398 rows=2 loops=1)
    ->  Index Scan Backward using message_pkey on message
(cost=0.00..88762.80 rows=1215 width=4) (actual time=0.816..932.395
rows=2 loops=1)
          Filter: ((NOT sender_has_deleted) AND (from_profile_sid = 1296))
  Total runtime: 932.432 ms
(4 rows)



I had already increased STATISTICS to 1000 for both from_profile_sid and
sender_has_deleted, and vacuum analyzed respectively (also did reindex),
but still statistical data is confusing me:


db=# SELECT n_distinct FROM pg_stats WHERE tablename='message' AND
attname='from_profile_sid';

  n_distinct
------------
        4068
(1 row)

db=# select avg(length) from (select from_profile_sid, count(*) as
length from message group by from_profile_sid) as freq;

  avg
----------------------
  206.5117822008693663
(1 row)



Any ideas/thoughts?


--
Kouber Saparev
http://kouber.saparev.com

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Why creating GIN table index is so slow than inserting data into empty table with the same index?
Следующее
От: Heikki Linnakangas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Why creating GIN table index is so slow than inserting data into empty table with the same index?