From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Mark Cave-Ayland <mark(dot)cave-ayland(at)siriusit(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Strange issue with GiST index scan taking far too long |
Date: | 2008-06-09 16:26:32 |
Message-ID: | 1213028792.12046.133.camel@ebony.site |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 11:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Cave-Ayland <mark(dot)cave-ayland(at)siriusit(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > So by adding in an extra function around the subselect result, we have
> > speeded up the index lookup by several orders of magnitude, and the
> > speedup appears to be coming from somewhere within the index scan?!
>
> Is the value you are fetching from the geography table large enough to
> be toasted? I'm thinking you might be looking at the cost of repeated
> de-toastings.
So you are saying it is de-toasted 32880 times, in this case? If not,
where are the repeated de-toastings happening?
Sounds like we need some stats on how well toast is working for us.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2008-06-09 16:37:47 | Re: pg_dump restore time and Foreign Keys |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2008-06-09 16:18:35 | Proposal: GiST constraints |