Re: Better performance possible for a pathological query?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Better performance possible for a pathological query?
Дата
Msg-id 6581.1375891657@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Better performance possible for a pathological query?  (Alexis Lê-Quôc <alq@datadoghq.com>)
Ответы Re: Better performance possible for a pathological query?
Список pgsql-performance
=?UTF-8?B?QWxleGlzIEzDqi1RdcO0Yw==?= <alq@datadoghq.com> writes:
> The query itself is very simple: a primary key lookup on a 1.5x10^7 rows.
> The issue is that we are looking up over 11,000 primary keys at once,
> causing the db to consume a lot of CPU.

It looks like most of the runtime is probably going into checking the
c.key = ANY (ARRAY[...]) construct.  PG isn't especially smart about that
if it fails to optimize the construct into an index operation --- I think
it's just searching the array linearly for each row meeting the other
restrictions on c.

You could try writing the test like this:
    c.key = ANY (VALUES (1), (17), (42), ...)
to see if the sub-select code path gives better results than the array
code path.  In a quick check it looked like this might produce a hash
join, which seemed promising anyway.

            regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: RE: [PERFORM] Re: [PERFORM] Sub-optimal plan for a paginated query on a view with another view inside of it.
Следующее
От: Alexis Lê-Quôc
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Better performance possible for a pathological query?