Re: Bad planning data resulting in OOM killing of postgres

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Hinkle <hinkle(at)cipafilter(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bad planning data resulting in OOM killing of postgres
Date: 2017-02-16 16:54:40
Message-ID: 10839.1487264080@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

David Hinkle <hinkle(at)cipafilter(dot)com> writes:
> Tom, there are three columns in this table that exhibit the problem,
> here is the statistics data after an analyze, and the real data to
> compare it to.

> attname | n_distinct | most_common_freqs

> titleid | 292 | {0.767167}

Ouch. That's saying there's some single value of titleid that accounts
for more than three-quarters of the entries ... does that square with
reality? That'd certainly explain why a hash join goes nuts.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Devoy 2017-02-16 16:59:35 Function out there to identify pseudo-empty fields, e.g. "n/a", "--", etc?
Previous Message Tim Bellis 2017-02-16 16:45:35 Re: Autovacuum stuck for hours, blocking queries