From: | Guillaume Cottenceau <gc(at)mnc(dot)ch> |
---|---|
To: | Kai Sellgren <kaisellgren(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slow counting on v9.3 |
Date: | 2014-01-16 08:42:57 |
Message-ID: | m3sisojp0u.fsf@mnc.ch |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Kai Sellgren <kaisellgren 'at' gmail.com> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I'm experiecing slow count performance:
>
> SELECT COUNT(*) AS "count"
> FROM "NewsArticle"
>
> Takes 210 ms. I've run analyze and vacuum. I'm on 9.3. Here're the stats http:/
> /d.pr/i/6YoB
>
> I don't understand why is it that slow. It returns 1 integer, and counts
> without filters.
You might actually have a lot more dead tuples than reported in
statistic. Last vacuum is old according to your screenshot. Try
"VACUUM FULL ANALYZE" on your table, then try again counting.
> This performs quickly:
>
> SELECT reltuples AS count
> FROM pg_class
> WHERE relname = 'NewsArticle';
This is not the same. This one uses precomputed statistics, and
doesn't scan the actual table data.
> But I'd like to add conditions so I don't like the last method.
>
>
> --
> Yours sincerely,
> Kai Sellgren
--
Guillaume Cottenceau
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Igor Neyman | 2014-01-16 15:41:49 | Re: Issue with query scanning through all data even with indexes |
Previous Message | Mehmet Çakoğlu | 2014-01-16 08:37:52 | Re: Slow counting on v9.3 |