Re: Slow query with sub-select

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: - - <loh(dot)law(at)hotmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Slow query with sub-select
Date: 2011-07-16 15:58:22
Message-ID: 27349.1310831902@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

- - <loh(dot)law(at)hotmail(dot)com> writes:
> The weird thing is that before I updated my server the query was about 5 times faster.
> I've googled and I think the problem lies with the under-estimation of the query planner about the number of rows in the nested table.I will be trying the 'set enable_seqscan = false' solution to see if that'll improve.

You evidently already do have that turned off. I'd suggest reverting
that change (ie, allow seqscan) and instead increase work_mem enough
so that the hash join can work without spilling to disk. This query
is a perfect example of where indexes do not help, and trying to force
them to be used makes things slower not faster.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message cesitarps 2011-07-16 16:14:35 pass XML as an argument and INSERT (key/value pairs) in postgresql
Previous Message - - 2011-07-16 14:42:39 Re: Slow query with sub-select