| From: | Steve Clark <sclark(at)netwolves(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: best way to query | 
| Date: | 2008-01-25 16:23:51 | 
| Message-ID: | 479A0D17.4040602@netwolves.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
Tom Lane wrote:
> Steve Clark <sclark(at)netwolves(dot)com> writes:
> 
>>explain shows:
> 
> 
>>  Aggregate  (cost=4712921585.30..4712921585.31 rows=1 width=0)
>>    ->  Seq Scan on t_event_ack_log a  (cost=103170.29..4712920878.60 
>>rows=282677 width=0)
>>          Filter: (NOT (subplan))
>>          SubPlan
>>            ->  Materialize  (cost=103170.29..117301.92 rows=1016163 
>>width=4)
>>                  ->  Index Scan using pk_tuel_eln on t_unit_event_log 
>>  (cost=0.00..98184.12 rows=1016163 width=4)
> 
> 
> Yeah, that's going to suck.  A brute force solution is to see if you
> can get it to switch to a "hashed subplan" by increasing work_mem.
> 
> Also, whatever is the ORDER BY for?
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
without the order by it wants to do a seq scan of t_unit_event_log.
see below:
  explain select count(*) from t_event_ack_log where event_log_no not 
in (select event_log_no from t_unit_event_log);
                                        QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Aggregate  (cost=12144872193.82..12144872193.82 rows=1 width=0)
    ->  Seq Scan on t_event_ack_log  (cost=0.00..12144871485.07 
rows=283497 width=0)
          Filter: (NOT (subplan))
          SubPlan
            ->  Seq Scan on t_unit_event_log  (cost=0.00..40286.56 
rows=1021156 width=4)
(5 rows)
Will try increasing work_memory.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Verite | 2008-01-25 16:50:41 | Re: best way to query | 
| Previous Message | Wes | 2008-01-25 16:14:04 | Re: REINDEX on large DB vs. DROP INDEX/CREATE INDEX |