From: | Nandakumar M <m(dot)nanda92(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Query optimiser is not using 'not null' constraint when 'order by nulls last' clause is used |
Date: | 2018-02-01 14:30:29 |
Message-ID: | CANcFUu63MDBXZrnGoBML551z2aA0KC3erWSeH=E-2nmyOF3rYQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi,
I am using Postgres version 9.4.4 on a Mac machine. I have 2 queries that
differ only in the order by clause. One of it has 'nulls last' and the
other one does not have it. The performance difference between the two is
considerable.
The slower of the two queries is
SELECT wos.notificationstatus,
wos.unrepliedcount,
wos.shownotestotech,
wos.ownerid,
wos.isfcr,
aau.user_id,
wo.workorderid AS "WOID",
wo.is_catalog_template AS "TemplateType",
wo.title AS "Title",
wo.is_catalog_template,
aau.first_name AS "Requester",
cd.categoryname AS "Category",
ti.first_name AS "Owner",
wo.duebytime AS "DueBy",
wo.fr_duetime,
wo.completedtime AS "CompletedTime",
wo.respondedtime AS "RespondedTime",
wo.resolvedtime AS "ResolvedTime",
qd.queuename AS "Group",
std.statusname AS "Status",
wo.createdtime AS "CreatedDate",
wos.isread,
wos.hasattachment,
wos.appr_statusid,
wos.priorityid,
wo.templateid AS "TemplateId",
pd.priorityid,
pd.priorityname AS "Priority",
pd.prioritycolor AS "PriorityColor",
wos.isoverdue,
wos.is_fr_overdue,
wos.linkedworkorderid,
wos.editing_status,
wos.editorid,
wos.linkedworkorderid,
wo.isparent,
sduser.isvipuser,
sduser_onbehalfof.isvipuser AS "ONBEHALFOFVIP",
wo.isparent,
wos.statusid,
sdorganization.name AS "Site",
wo.workorderid AS "RequestID"
FROM workorder wo
left join workorder_fields wof
ON wo.workorderid=wof.workorderid
left join servicecatalog_fields scf
ON wo.workorderid=scf.workorderid
left join wotoprojects wtp
ON wo.workorderid=wtp.workorderid
left join sitedefinition
ON wo.siteid=sitedefinition.siteid
left join sdorganization
ON sitedefinition.siteid=sdorganization.org_id
inner join workorderstates wos
ON wo.workorderid=wos.workorderid
left join categorydefinition cd
ON wos.categoryid=cd.categoryid
left join aaauser ti
ON wos.ownerid=ti.user_id
left join aaauser aau
ON wo.requesterid=aau.user_id
left join prioritydefinition pd
ON wos.priorityid=pd.priorityid
left join statusdefinition std
ON wos.statusid=std.statusid
left join workorder_queue wo_queue
ON wo.workorderid=wo_queue.workorderid
left join queuedefinition qd
ON wo_queue.queueid=qd.queueid
left join departmentdefinition dpt
ON wo.deptid=dpt.deptid
left join leveldefinition lvd
ON wos.levelid=lvd.levelid
left join modedefinition mdd
ON wo.modeid=mdd.modeid
left join urgencydefinition urgdef
ON wos.urgencyid=urgdef.urgencyid
left join impactdefinition impdef
ON wos.impactid=impdef.impactid
left join requesttypedefinition rtdef
ON wos.requesttypeid=rtdef.requesttypeid
left join subcategorydefinition scd
ON wos.subcategoryid=scd.subcategoryid
left join itemdefinition icd
ON wos.itemid=icd.itemid
left join servicedefinition serdef
ON wo.serviceid=serdef.serviceid
left join aaauser cbau
ON wo.createdbyid=cbau.user_id
left join aaauser oboaau
ON wo.oboid=oboaau.user_id
left join sduser
ON wo.requesterid=sduser.userid
left join sduser sduser_onbehalfof
ON wo.oboid=sduser_onbehalfof.userid
left join workorder_fields
ON wo.workorderid=workorder_fields.workorderid
WHERE ((
wos.statusid = 1)
AND (
wo.isparent = TRUE))
ORDER BY 7 DESC nulls last limit 25
On removing 'nulls last' from the order by clause the query becomes very
fast. I have attached the query plan for both the queries.
From the plan it looks like the second query is able to efficiently use the
workorder_pk index ( The node 'Index Scan Backward using workorder_pk on
workorder' returns 25 rows) whereas the first query is not able to use the
index efficiently (more than 300k rows are returned from the same node).
The column workorderid is a PK column. The query optimizer should ideally
know that there is no nulls in this column and in effect there is no
difference between the two queries.
I tried the same in Postgres 10 and the slower query performs much better
due to parallel sequential scans but still it is less efficient than the
query without 'nulls last'.
I thought it would be best to raise this with the Postgres team.
Regards,
Nanda
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
pg_9_4_Fast.txt | text/plain | 7.2 KB |
pg_9_4_Slow.txt | text/plain | 9.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-02-01 15:00:41 | Re: bad plan using nested loops |
Previous Message | Johan Fredriksson | 2018-02-01 10:42:07 | bad plan using nested loops |