From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Henrik Zagerholm <henke(at)mac(dot)se> |
Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] Planner making wrong decisions 8.2.4. Insane cost calculations. |
Date: | 2007-08-06 15:31:51 |
Message-ID: | 27852.1186414311@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
Henrik Zagerholm <henke(at)mac(dot)se> writes:
> WHERE file_indexed IS FALSE
> AND file_copied IS TRUE
> AND file_size < (1024)
> AND LOWER
> (file_suffix) IN(
> SELECT LOWER
> (filetype_suffix) FROM tbl_filetype_suffix WHERE
> filetype_suffix_index IS TRUE
> ) AND fk_archive_id
> = 115 ORDER BY fk_tar_id
Do you really need the lower() calls there? The planner is getting the
wrong estimate for the selectivity of the IN-clause, which is likely
because it has no statistics about lower(file_suffix) or
lower(filetype_suffix).
If you don't want to constrain the data to be already lower'd, then
setting up functional indexes on the two lower() expressions should
prompt ANALYZE to track stats for them.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Keaton Adams | 2007-08-06 15:44:02 | Template zero xid issue |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-08-06 15:31:14 | Re: [PERFORM] Planner making wrong decisions 8.2.4. Insane cost calculations. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Henrik Zagerholm | 2007-08-06 15:50:22 | Re: Extreme slow select query 8.2.4 |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-08-06 15:31:14 | Re: [PERFORM] Planner making wrong decisions 8.2.4. Insane cost calculations. |