Re: Limit & offset effect on query plans

From: "Kevin Grittner" <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>,"Amitabh Kant" <amitabhkant(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Limit & offset effect on query plans
Date: 2012-12-13 17:07:00
Message-ID: 20121213170700.80080@gmx.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com> writes:

>> I ran some quick tests on my i7 under Linux. Plan time was
>> increased by about 40 microseconds (based on EXPLAIN runtime)
>> and added a limit node to the plan. Execution time on a SELECT *
>> FROM tenk1 in the regression database went up by 1.35 ms on
>> fully cached runs.
>
> 1.35ms out of what?

Without the limit node the runtimes (after "priming" the cache)
were:

1.805, 2.533
1.805, 2.495
1.800, 2.446
1.818, 2.470
1.804, 2.502

The first time for each run is "Total runtime" reported by EXPLAIN,
the second is what psql reported from having \timing on.

With the limit node:

3.237, 3.914
3.243, 3.918
3.263, 4.010
3.265, 3.943
3.272, 3.953

I eyeballed that in the console window and said 1.35 based on rough
in-my-head calculations, although with it laid out in a nicer
format, I think I was a little low.

-Kevin

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ghislain ROUVIGNAC 2012-12-13 17:10:04 Slow queries after vacuum analyze
Previous Message Filip Rembiałkowski 2012-12-13 16:44:01 Re: problem with large inserts