query plan question, nested loop vs hash join

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andrey Lizenko
Тема query plan question, nested loop vs hash join
Дата
Msg-id CADKuZZB=TeBszkxmzPGeZ14cBm4wpCqK9TsfXyUoooamPzekOw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответы Re: query plan question, nested loop vs hash join
Список pgsql-performance
Hi, 
I have similar problem as in 

server version is 9.3.4

Here is only two quite simple tables:

db_new=# \d activities_example
  Table "public.activities_example"
     Column     |  Type   | Modifiers
----------------+---------+-----------
 id             | integer |
 order_chain_id | integer |
Indexes:
    "activities_example_idx" btree (order_chain_id)

db_new=# \d orders_example
Table "public.orders_example"
 Column |  Type   | Modifiers
--------+---------+-----------
 id     | integer |

Number of rows as below: 

db_new=# select count(*) from activities_example ;
  count
---------
 3059965

db_new=# select count(*) from orders_example ;
 count
-------
 19038

db_new=# select count(*) from activities_example where order_chain_id in (select id from orders_example);
 count
-------
 91426
(1 row)


and I can see that planner uses hashjoin with all enabled options and nested loop with disabled parameter:

db_new=# explain analyze select * from activities_example where order_chain_id in (select id from orders_example);
                                                             QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hash Semi Join  (cost=513.36..57547.59 rows=89551 width=8) (actual time=18.340..966.367 rows=91426 loops=1)
   Hash Cond: (activities_example.order_chain_id = orders_example.id)
   ->  Seq Scan on activities_example  (cost=0.00..44139.65 rows=3059965 width=8) (actual time=0.018..294.216 rows=3059965 loops=1)
   ->  Hash  (cost=275.38..275.38 rows=19038 width=4) (actual time=5.458..5.458 rows=19038 loops=1)
         Buckets: 2048  Batches: 1  Memory Usage: 670kB
         ->  Seq Scan on orders_example  (cost=0.00..275.38 rows=19038 width=4) (actual time=0.015..2.308 rows=19038 loops=1)
 Total runtime: 970.234 ms
(7 rows)

db_new=# set enable_hashjoin = off;
SET
db_new=# explain analyze select * from activities_example where order_chain_id in (select id from orders_example);
                                                                     QUERY PLAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Nested Loop  (cost=1629.09..166451.01 rows=89551 width=8) (actual time=16.091..116.476 rows=91426 loops=1)
   ->  Unique  (cost=1628.66..1723.85 rows=19038 width=4) (actual time=15.929..23.156 rows=19038 loops=1)
         ->  Sort  (cost=1628.66..1676.25 rows=19038 width=4) (actual time=15.892..19.884 rows=19038 loops=1)
               Sort Key: orders_example.id
               Sort Method: external sort  Disk: 264kB
               ->  Seq Scan on orders_example  (cost=0.00..275.38 rows=19038 width=4) (actual time=0.015..2.747 rows=19038 loops=1)
   ->  Index Scan using activities_example_idx on activities_example  (cost=0.43..8.60 rows=5 width=8) (actual time=0.002..0.004 rows=5 loops=19038)
         Index Cond: (order_chain_id = orders_example.id)
 Total runtime: 121.366 ms
(9 rows)

second runtime is much more quicker.

What is the reason of "Seq Scan on activities_example" in the first case?
Is it possible to force optimizer choose the second plan without doing  "set enable_hashjoin = off;" ?

Increasing  of 'effective_cache_size' leads to similar thing with mergejoin,
other options (work_mem, shared_buffers. etc) do not change anything.

Thanks in advance.

-- 
Regards, Andrey Lizenko

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: George Neuner
Дата:
Сообщение: help: function failing
Следующее
От: Mike Blackwell
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_basebackup - odd performance