From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Shrikant Bhende <shrikantpostgresql(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slow running query |
Date: | 2019-12-11 15:32:49 |
Message-ID: | 14517.1576078369@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Shrikant Bhende <shrikantpostgresql(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Below is the query which is running very slow, can anyone suggest any
> improvement for the same to make it faster.
Not when you haven't given us any supporting data :-(. There's some
advice about how to ask useful performance questions here:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Slow_Query_Questions
However, just scanning your EXPLAIN output, it seems that the bulk
of the time is being spent inside two user-defined functions:
> -> Function Scan on get_num_connections f (cost=0.25..10.25 rows=1000 width=24) (actual time=22331.461..22331.479 rows=263 loops=1)
...
> -> Function Scan on get_num_proprietary f_1 (cost=0.25..10.25 rows=1000 width=24) (actual time=4052.081..4052.085 rows=26 loops=1)
...
> Planning time: 18.362 ms
> Execution time: 33944.679 ms
ie, 26 of the 34 seconds are being spent there. You're not going to be
able to move the needle very far unless you can make those a lot cheaper.
I notice that the first thing the plan does with these is FULL JOIN them
to each other, which seems suspiciously like a performance anti-pattern.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Min Wang | 2019-12-11 17:16:26 | Does PostgreSQL 11 work with FreeRADIUS 3? |
Previous Message | sunil kumar | 2019-12-11 08:45:22 | Re: Slow running query |