Re: why subplan is 10x faster then function?

2017-10-01 12:45 GMT+02:00 Sokolov Yura <funny(dot)falcon(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>:

> 1 октября 2017 г. 12:42:14 GMT+03:00, Pavel Stehule <
> pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> пишет:
> >2017-09-30 23:23 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> >
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> I have some strange slow queries based on usage "view" functions
> >>
> >> one function looks like this:
> >>
> >> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION
> >ides_funcs.najdatsplt_cislo_exekuce(mid_najdatsplt
> >> bigint)
> >> RETURNS character varying
> >> LANGUAGE sql
> >> STABLE
> >> AS $function$
> >> select CISLOEXEKUCE
> >> from najzalobpr MT, najvzallok A1,
> >> NAJZALOBST A2, NAJZALOBCE A3 where
> >> MT.ID_NAJVZALLOK= A1.ID_NAJVZALLOK AND
> >> A1.ID_NAJZALOBST=A2.ID_NAJZALOBST AND
> >> A2.ID_NAJZALOBCE= A3.ID_NAJZALOBCE AND
> >> MT.ID_NAJDATSPLT = mID_NAJDATSPLT LIMIT 1;
> >> $function$ cost 20
> >> ;
> >>
> >> I know so using this kind of functions is not good idea - it is
> >customer
> >> old code generated from Oracle. I had idea about possible planner
> >issues.
> >> But this is a executor issue.
> >>
> >> when this function is evaluated as function, then execution needs
> >about 46
> >> sec
> >>
> >> -> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.71..780360.31 rows=589657
> >> width=2700) (actual time=47796.588..47796.588 rows=0 loops=1)
> >> -> Nested Loop (cost=0.29..492947.20 rows=589657
> >width=2559)
> >> (actual time=47796.587..47796.587 rows=0 loops=1)
> >> -> Seq Scan on najdatsplt mt (cost=0.00..124359.24
> >> rows=1106096 width=1013) (actual time=47796.587..47796.587 rows=0
> >loops=1)
> >> Filter:
> >(najdatsplt_cislo_exekuce(id_najdatsplt) IS
> >> NOT NULL)
> >> Rows Removed by Filter: 1111654
> >>
> >> When I use correlated subquery, then
> >>
> >> -> Nested Loop (cost=0.29..19876820.11 rows=589657 width=2559)
> >(actual
> >> time=3404.154..3404.154 rows=0 loops=1)
> >> -> Seq Scan on najdatsplt mt (cost=0.00..19508232.15 rows=1106096
> >> width=1013) (actual time=3404.153..3404.153 rows=0 loops=1)
> >> Filter: ((SubPlan 11) IS NOT NULL)
> >> Rows Removed by Filter: 1111654
> >> SubPlan 11
> >> -> Limit (cost=1.10..17.49 rows=1 width=144) (actual
> >> time=0.002..0.002 rows=0 loops=1111654)
> >> -> Nested Loop (cost=1.10..17.49 rows=1 width=144)
> >(actual
> >> time=0.002..0.002 rows=0 loops=1111654)
> >> -> Nested Loop (cost=0.83..17.02 rows=1
> >width=8)
> >> (actual time=0.002..0.002 rows=0 loops=1111654)
> >> -> Nested Loop (cost=0.56..16.61 rows=1
> >> width=8) (actual time=0.002..0.002 rows=0 loops=1111654)
> >>
> >> The execution plan is +/- same - the bottleneck is in function
> >execution
> >>
> >> Tested with same result on 9.6, 10.
> >>
> >> Is known overhead of function execution?
> >>
> >>
> >profile of slow execution looks like
> >
> >+ 24,71% 24,40% 48235 postmaster [.] SearchCatCache
> >+ 14,25% 0,00% 0 postmaster [unknown] [.]
> >0000000000000000
> >+ 9,76% 9,65% 19071 postmaster [.]
> >TupleDescInitEntry
> >+ 3,91% 3,86% 7625 postmaster [.]
> >ExecAssignScanProjectionInfoWithVarno
> >+ 3,56% 3,52% 6955 postmaster [.] AllocSetAlloc
> >+ 2,66% 2,63% 5193 postmaster [.]
> >FunctionCall2Coll
> >+ 2,65% 2,62% 5183 postmaster [.]
> >ResourceArrayRemove
> >+ 2,42% 2,39% 4719 postmaster [.]
> >ExecTypeFromTLInternal
> >+ 2,21% 2,19% 4321 postmaster [.]
> >DirectFunctionCall1Coll
> >+ 2,02% 2,00% 3961 postmaster [.]
> >heap_getsysattr
> >+ 1,85% 1,82% 3604 postmaster [.]
> >exprTypmod
> >+ 1,81% 1,79% 3540 postmaster [.]
> >ResourceArrayAdd
> >+ 1,68% 1,66% 3282 postmaster [.]
> >hash_uint32
> >+ 1,65% 1,63% 3214 postmaster [.]
> >hash_search_with_hash_value
> >+ 1,64% 1,62% 3208 postmaster [.]
> >CatalogCacheComputeHashValue
> >+ 1,28% 1,26% 2498 postmaster [.]
> >MemoryContextAllocZeroAligned
> >+ 1,25% 1,24% 2446 postmaster [.] palloc0
> >
> >Any ides why SearchCatCache is called too often?
> >
> >
> >
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Pavel
> >>
>
> Looks like you've already collected profile with call-graph. So you can
> tell us where it were called from.
>

There was zero info. I'll try to install this database on my notebook, and
I'll see

Pavel

>
> With regards,
> --
> Sokolov Yura aka funny_falcon
>