Re: Difference in query plan

Thanks,

I'm already doing a vacuum full every night on all database, but the REINDEX fix it and now it's working fine

But this raise a question

1) This table is cleared every night and recomputed, does this mean that I should REINDEX every night also

2) Why this thing didn't happen in the other schema

Thanks again

Patrice Beliveau wrote:

> > I have a database in a production server (8.1.9) with to schema
> > containing the sames table same index, same every thing, but with
> > different data. When I execute a query in one schema, it take much more
> > time to execute then the other schema.
>
[snip]

> > I'm wondering where to start searching to fix this problem
>

> > Production server schema 1 query plan:
> > Nested Loop (cost=569.23..634.43 rows=1 width=121) (actual
> > time=1032.811..1032.811 rows=0 loops=1)
>
[snip]

> > Total runtime: 1034.204 ms
>

> > Production server schema 2 query plan:
> > Nested Loop (cost=133.42..793.12 rows=1 width=123) (actual
> > time=0.130..0.130 rows=0 loops=1)
>
[snip]

> > Total runtime: 0.305 ms
>

Well there's something strange - the estimated costs are fairly similar
(643.43 vs 793.12) but the times are clearly very different (1034 vs 0.3ms)

The suspicious line from the first plan is:

> > -> Seq Scan on mrp m (cost=0.00..119.92 rows=5892
> > width=39) (actual time=0.343..939.462 rows=5892 loops=1)
>

This is taking up almost all the time in the query and yet only seems to
be scanning 5892 rows.

Run a vacuum verbose against table "mrp" and see if it's got a lot of
dead rows. If it has, run VACUUM FULL and REINDEX against it and see if
that solves your problem.

I'm guessing you have / had a long-running transaction interfering with
vacuum on this table, or perhaps a bulk update/delete?

-- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
-- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list
(pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org) To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance .