Re: Slow index scan on B-Tree index over timestamp field

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Caio Casimiro
Тема Re: Slow index scan on B-Tree index over timestamp field
Дата
Msg-id CAK42QYFHcY33U+9xHH1W=bYE4SNzkSa2oVaBkzwdwSPGJ=TXKA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Slow index scan on B-Tree index over timestamp field  (Igor Neyman <ineyman@perceptron.com>)
Ответы Re: Slow index scan on B-Tree index over timestamp field  (Igor Neyman <ineyman@perceptron.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
These are the parameters I have set in postgresql.conf:

work_mem = 128MB
shared_buffers = 1GB
maintenance_work_mem = 1536MB
fsync = off
synchronous_commit = off
effective_cache_size = 2GB

The hardware is a modest one:
CPU: Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU  230   @ 1.60GHz
RAM: 2GB
HD: 1TV 7200 RPM (WDC WD10EZEX-00RKKA0)

This machine runs a slackware 14.0 dedicated to the Postgresql. 

Thank you,
Caio



On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Igor Neyman <ineyman@perceptron.com> wrote:
From: Caio Casimiro [mailto:casimiro.listas@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 4:10 PM
To: Igor Neyman
Cc: Jeff Janes; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow index scan on B-Tree index over timestamp field

Hi Neyman, thank you for your answer.
Unfortunately this query runs almost at the same time:

Sort  (cost=4877693.98..4877702.60 rows=3449 width=20) (actual time=25820.291..25821.845 rows=1640 loops=1)
  Sort Key: tt.tweet_id
  Sort Method: quicksort  Memory: 97kB
  Buffers: shared hit=1849 read=32788
  ->  Nested Loop  (cost=247.58..4877491.32 rows=3449 width=20) (actual time=486.839..25814.120 rows=1640 loops=1)
        Buffers: shared hit=1849 read=32788
        ->  Hash Semi Join  (cost=229.62..88553.23 rows=1681 width=8) (actual time=431.654..13209.159 rows=597 loops=1)
              Hash Cond: (t.user_id = relationship.followed_id)
              Buffers: shared hit=3 read=31870
              ->  Index Scan using tweet_creation_time_index on tweet t  (cost=0.57..83308.25 rows=1781234 width=16) (actual time=130.144..10037.764 rows=1759645 loops=1)
                    Index Cond: ((creation_time >= '2013-05-05 00:00:00-03'::timestamp with time zone) AND (creation_time <= '2013-05-06 00:00:00-03'::timestamp with time zone))
                    Buffers: shared hit=1 read=31867
              ->  Hash  (cost=227.12..227.12 rows=154 width=8) (actual time=94.365..94.365 rows=106 loops=1)
                    Buckets: 1024  Batches: 1  Memory Usage: 3kB
                    Buffers: shared hit=2 read=3
                    ->  Index Only Scan using relationship_id on relationship  (cost=0.42..227.12 rows=154 width=8) (actual time=74.540..94.101 rows=106 loops=1)
                          Index Cond: (follower_id = 335093362)
                          Heap Fetches: 0
                          Buffers: shared hit=2 read=3
        ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on tweet_topic tt  (cost=17.96..2841.63 rows=723 width=20) (actual time=21.014..21.085 rows=3 loops=597)
              Recheck Cond: (tweet_id = t.id)
              Buffers: shared hit=1846 read=918
              ->  Bitmap Index Scan on tweet_topic_pk  (cost=0.00..17.78 rows=723 width=0) (actual time=15.012..15.012 rows=3 loops=597)
                    Index Cond: (tweet_id = t.id)
                    Buffers: shared hit=1763 read=632
Total runtime: 25823.386 ms

I have noticed that in both queries the index scan on tweet_creation_time_index is very expensive. Is there anything I can do to make the planner choose a index only scan?

Thank you,
Caio

Just try the following:

SELECT tt.tweet_id, tt.topic, tt.topic_value
            FROM tweet_topic AS tt  JOIN tweet AS t ON (tt.tweet_id = t.id
                                                  AND t.creation_time BETWEEN 'D1' AND 'D2' AND t.user_id in
                                         (SELECT followed_id FROM relationship WHERE follower_id = N))
 ORDER BY tt.tweet_id;

And see if it helps with performance.

Regards,
Igor Neyman

What is your hardware configuration, and Postgres config parameters modified from default values?

Regards,
Igor Neyman

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Igor Neyman
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Slow index scan on B-Tree index over timestamp field
Следующее
От: Caio Casimiro
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Slow index scan on B-Tree index over timestamp field