From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr(dot)rosas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Extremely slow DELETE with cascade foreign keys |
Date: | 2017-12-05 17:25:26 |
Message-ID: | 10850.1512494726@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>> explain analyze delete from field_values where transaction_id=226;
>> QUERY PLAN
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Delete on field_values (cost=0.43..257.93 rows=481 width=6) (actual
>> time=367375.805..367375.805 rows=0 loops=1)
>> -> Index Scan using index_field_values_on_transaction_id on
>> field_values (cost=0.43..257.93 rows=481 width=6) (actual time=0.223..4.216
>> rows=651 loops=1)
>> Index Cond: (transaction_id = 226)
>> Planning time: 0.234 ms
>> Execution time: 367375.882 ms
>> (5 registros)
>>
>> Time: 367377,085 ms (06:07,377)
> Normally this is because you lack indexes on the referencing columns, so
> the query that scans the table to find the referencing rows is a
> seqscan.
Actually though ... the weird thing about this is that I'd expect to
see a separate line in the EXPLAIN output for time spent in the FK
trigger. Where'd that go?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas | 2017-12-05 17:27:28 | Re: Extremely slow DELETE with cascade foreign keys |
Previous Message | Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas | 2017-12-05 17:22:45 | Re: Extremely slow DELETE with cascade foreign keys |