From: | Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Plan output: actual execution time not considering loops? |
Date: | 2018-06-20 10:51:26 |
Message-ID: | c920e568-5b6a-7014-b2a4-6a59c403a704@gmx.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Consider the following execution plan:
Seq Scan on orders o1 (cost=0.00..18818840.86 rows=3500 width=16) (actual time=0.033..8625.104 rows=99906 loops=1)
Filter: (amount = (SubPlan 1))
Rows Removed by Filter: 600094
Buffers: shared hit=7719778
SubPlan 1
-> Aggregate (cost=26.87..26.87 rows=1 width=32) (actual time=0.012..0.012 rows=1 loops=700000)
Buffers: shared hit=7714631
-> Bitmap Heap Scan on orders o2 (cost=3.45..26.85 rows=8 width=8) (actual time=0.004..0.008 rows=8 loops=700000)
Recheck Cond: (customer_id = o1.customer_id)
Heap Blocks: exact=5597311
Buffers: shared hit=7714631
-> Bitmap Index Scan on orders_customer_id_order_date_idx (cost=0.00..3.45 rows=8 width=0) (actual time=0.003..0.003 rows=8 loops=700000)
Index Cond: (customer_id = o1.customer_id)
Buffers: shared hit=2117320
Planning time: 0.136 ms
Execution time: 8628.724 ms
My expectation would have been that the "Aggregate" step shows the actual time as a product of the number of loops.
The Bitmap Heap Scan takes 0.008ms for each execution, so shouldn't the "actual time" for the "Aggregate" step be 0.008ms * 700000 (= 5600ms)?
The plan was generated using Postgres 10.4 (on Windows 10, but I think that is irrelevant)
Thomas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Janning Vygen | 2018-06-20 11:51:25 | Suggestion about logging only every n-th statement |
Previous Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2018-06-20 08:16:54 | Re: PostgreSQL Volume Question |