From: | Russell Smith <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | David West <david(dot)west(at)cusppoint(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: limit clause breaks query planner? |
Date: | 2008-09-02 03:54:53 |
Message-ID: | 48BCB90D.8090606@pws.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hello
>
> 2008/9/1 David West <david(dot)west(at)cusppoint(dot)com>:
>
>> Thanks for your suggestion but the result is the same.
>>
>> Here is the explain analyse output from different queries.
>> Select * from my_table where A is null and B = '21' limit 15
>>
>> "Limit (cost=0.00..3.68 rows=15 width=128) (actual time=85837.043..85896.140 rows=15 loops=1)"
>> " -> Seq Scan on my_table this_ (cost=0.00..258789.88 rows=1055580 width=128) (actual time=85837.038..85896.091 rows=15 loops=1)"
>> " Filter: ((A IS NULL) AND ((B)::text = '21'::text))"
>> "Total runtime: 85896.214 ms"
>>
>>
[snip]
Further to Pavel's comments;
(actual time=85837.038..85896.091 rows=15 loops=1)
That's 85 seconds on a sequence scan to return the first tuple. The table is not bloated by any chance is it?
Regards
Russell
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2008-09-02 05:32:01 | Re: too many clog files |
Previous Message | Duan Ligong | 2008-09-02 01:38:21 | Re: too many clog files |