Re: Help me in reducing the CPU cost for the high cost query below, as it is hitting production seriously!!

From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
To: pavan95 <pavan(dot)postgresdba(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Help me in reducing the CPU cost for the high cost query below, as it is hitting production seriously!!
Date: 2018-05-22 18:23:07
Message-ID: 20180522182307.GA9330@telsasoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:51:44AM -0700, pavan95 wrote:
> Please find the output of explain(analyze,buffers) for the whole query in
> the below link.

> Seq Scan on res_users users (cost=750.92..1,836.69 rows=249 width=15) (actual time=3.962..17.544 rows=67 loops=1)

Not sure but would you try creating an index on:
res_users.res_employee_id

> Seq Scan on res_users user1 (cost=0.00..58.03 rows=1,303 width=15) (actual time=0.002..0.002 rows=1 loops=1)

Also the planner's estimate for table:res_users is off by 1300x..so you should
probably vacuum analyze it then recheck. I don't think we know what version
postgres you have, but last week's patch releases include a fix which may be
relevant (reltuples including dead tuples).

Also I don't know the definition of this table or its indices:
tms_workflow_history

..but it looks like an additional or modified index or maybe clustering the
table on existing index might help (active? is_final_approver?)
Or maybe this should be 3 separate indices rather than composite index?
Perhaps some of those could be BRIN indices, depending on postgres version

Justin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Teja 2018-05-22 18:25:39 Re: Help me in reducing the CPU cost for the high cost query below, as it is hitting production seriously!!
Previous Message pavan95 2018-05-22 10:51:44 Re: Help me in reducing the CPU cost for the high cost query below, as it is hitting production seriously!!