| From: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | Roman Fail <rfail(at)posportal(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pgsql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 7.3.1 New install, large queries are slow |
| Date: | 2003-01-15 19:53:11 |
| Message-ID: | 1042660391.61110.36.camel@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
I didn't see the query itself in the message, but it looks to me like
it's poorly formed. Could you send it?
By quick glance, either you're using a bunch of explicit joins that are
poorly formed (you've made a bad choice in order) or those particular
IDs are really popular. There are a number of sequential scans that
possibly should be index scans.
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE RESULTS:
> Limit (cost=370518.31..370518.31 rows=1 width=540) (actual time=1168722.18..1168722.20 rows=5 loops=1)
> -> Sort (cost=370518.31..370518.31 rows=1 width=540) (actual time=1168722.18..1168722.18 rows=5 loops=1)
> Sort Key: b.batchdate
--
Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>
PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2003-01-15 20:10:12 | Re: 7.3.1 New install, large queries are slow |
| Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2003-01-15 19:44:01 | Re: 7.3.1 New install, large queries are slow |