Re: query plan question, nested loop vs hash join

From: Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andrey Lizenko <lizenko79(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: query plan question, nested loop vs hash join
Date: 2014-10-05 19:18:32
Message-ID: CAGnEboifi+E_cMRZLbH5grhGeonVwvzF-01Ev=h64--WFuMd6Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

2014-10-05 21:57 GMT+03:00 Andrey Lizenko <lizenko79(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> Increasing of 'effective_cache_size' leads to similar thing with
> mergejoin,
> other options (work_mem, shared_buffers. etc) do not change anything.
>

I think increasing `work_mem` should have effects, as plan with `Nested
Loop` is using disk-based sort.
Increase it till you'll stop seeing `external sort` in the EXPLAIN output.
Something like '10MB' should do.

Also, it'd be handy if you could provide `EXPLAIN (analyze, buffers)`
output along with the results of these queries:

SELECT name,setting,source FROM pg_settings WHERE name ~ 'cost' AND NOT
name ~ 'vacuum';
SELECT name,setting,source FROM pg_settings WHERE NOT source IN
('default','override');

And describe your setup: what OS? how much RAM? what kind of disks? RAID?

--
Victor Y. Yegorov

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-10-05 19:47:52 Re: query plan question, nested loop vs hash join
Previous Message Andrey Lizenko 2014-10-05 18:57:18 query plan question, nested loop vs hash join