From: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Idea for reducing planning time |
Date: | 2001-02-28 13:00:05 |
Message-ID: | 20010228220005G.t-ishii@sra.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > Tom, do you have a plan to make a back patch for 7.0.3?
>
> No, I don't. No time for it now.
>
> > I got a bug report from a user with a script to reproduce the
> > problem. Seems the backend consumes infinite memory.
>
> Not infinite, surely ;-) ... but possibly more than her kernel will
> allow. As a workaround, I'd suggest setting geqo_threshold smaller,
> perhaps 8 or 9. IIRC, the way to do that in 7.0 is
> set geqo='on=8';
> Not sure if it's possible to set up a system-wide default for that
> in 7.0.
Yes, I thought about geqo too. However, a standard geqo settings
didn't help. It still took 0:49 (7.0.2, 7.1 takes only ~3 seconds).
Then I set:
Pool_Size 128
Generations 10
and now the query takes only 5 seconds!
> BTW, the main reason planning this join in 7.0 is so slow is that
> all the options look exactly alike and so the planner has no reason to
> discard any paths. As soon as you create some indexes, load up some
> data and VACUUM, the symmetry would be broken and performance should
> improve (geqo or not). Or at least it'd usually be broken. Is it
> possible that all her tables are exactly the same size?
Yes. t_cyuubunrui has four rows, and the others has only a row.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2001-02-28 13:54:45 | strange error |
Previous Message | Peter Schindler | 2001-02-28 11:05:04 | Re: stuck spinlock |