From: | Matthew Lunnon <mlunnon(at)rwa-net(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | mclister(at)zeesource(dot)net, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: JDBC/Stored procedure performance issue |
Date: | 2008-01-29 10:12:49 |
Message-ID: | 479EFC21.60606@rwa-net.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi Tom,
Is there any way to work out what plan the query is using in side the
function? I think I have a similar problem with a query taking much
longer from inside a function than it does as a select statement.
Regards
Matthew
Tom Lane wrote:
> Claire McLister <mclister(at)zeesource(dot)net> writes:
>
>> When I do an EXPLAIN ANALYZE on one query that returns 3261 rows, it
>> executes in a reasonable 159ms:
>> ...
>> If I issue the same query over JDBC or use a PSQL stored procedure, it
>> takes over 3000 ms, which, of course is unacceptable!
>>
>
> I suspect that the problem is with "groupid = $1" instead of
> "groupid = 57925". The planner is probably avoiding an indexscan
> in the parameterized case because it's guessing the actual value will
> match so many rows as to make a seqscan faster. Is the distribution
> of groupid highly skewed? You might get better results if you increase
> the statistics target for that column.
>
> Switching to something newer than 7.4.x might help too. 8.1 and up
> support "bitmap" indexscans which work much better for large numbers
> of hits, and correspondingly the planner will use one in cases where
> it wouldn't use a plain indexscan.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by Verizon Business Internet Managed Scanning Services - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.verizonbusiness.com/uk
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Arjen van der Meijden | 2008-01-29 10:29:23 | Re: 8x2.5" or 6x3.5" disks |
Previous Message | david | 2008-01-29 08:32:25 | Re: 8x2.5" or 6x3.5" disks |