Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time
От
Kevin Grittner
Тема
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query
time
Дата
Msg-id
4B1522CE020000250002CEB1@gw.wicourts.gov
Ответ на
Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time (Richard Neill)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Richard Neill <rn214@cam.ac.uk>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Jean-Michel Pouré <jmpoure@free.fr>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Richard Neill <rn214@cam.ac.uk>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query
time "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Richard Neill <rn214@cam.ac.uk>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query
time "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query
time "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query
time "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Richard Neill <rn214@cam.ac.uk>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query
time "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query time Richard Neill <rn214@cam.ac.uk>
Re: Order by (for 15 rows) adds 30 seconds to query
time "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Richard Neill wrote: > I'd expect the ORDER BY to be the last thing that runs > Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.00..727737158.77 > rows=806903677108 width=195) (actual time=31739.052..32862.322 > rows=15 loops=1) It probably would if it knew there were going to be 15 rows to sort. It is estimating that there will be 806,903,677,108 rows, in which case it thinks that using the index will be faster. The question is why it's 10 or 11 orders of magnitude off on the estimate of result rows. Could you show us the table definitions underlying that view? -Kevin
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления
От: Jean-Michel Pouré
Дата: