| From: | "Ozer, Pam" <pozer(at)automotive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Slow Query- Bad Row Estimate |
| Date: | 2010-10-29 21:45:52 |
| Message-ID: | 216FFB77CBFAEE4B8EE4DF0A939FF1D1018358@mail-001.corp.automotive.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
I am not sure what you mean by reformulate the data representation. Do
you mean do I have to join on all three columns?
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 2:18 PM
To: Ozer, Pam
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow Query- Bad Row Estimate
"Ozer, Pam" <pozer(at)automotive(dot)com> writes:
> Unfortunately I have not received a response on this question. Is
more
> information needed? Does anyone have any ideas why the estimates may
be
> bad? Or what I might be able to do to speed this up?
The most likely explanation for the bad rowcount estimates is that there
is correlation between the regionid/countyid/cityid columns, only the
planner doesn't know it. Can you reformulate that data representation
at all, or at least avoid depending on it as a join key?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ozer, Pam | 2010-10-29 21:47:55 | Re: Slow Query- Bad Row Estimate |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-10-29 21:39:56 | Re: Slow Query- Bad Row Estimate |