From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)gluefinance(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: LIMIT causes planner to do Index Scan using a less optimal index |
Date: | 2010-04-06 18:33:51 |
Message-ID: | o2k603c8f071004061133qbfeccea6iec13efdbc3c080d7@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Joel Jacobson <joel(at)gluefinance(dot)com> wrote:
> Is this a bug? I'm using version 8.4.1.
It's not really a bug, but it's definitely not a feature either.
> Limit (cost=0.00..43.46 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=1023.213..1023.214
> rows=1 loops=1)
> -> Index Scan using transactions_pkey on transactions
> (cost=0.00..493029.74 rows=11345 width=4) (actual time=1023.212..1023.212
> rows=1 loops=1)
> Filter: ((accountid = 108) AND (currency = 'SEK'::bpchar))
> Total runtime: 1023.244 ms
> (4 rows)
The planner's idea here is that rows matching the filter criteria will
be common enough that an index scan over transactions_pkey will find
one fairly quickly, at which point the executor can return that row
and stop. But it turns out that those rows aren't as common as the
planner thinks, so the search takes a long time.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2010-04-06 18:45:59 | Re: Some question |
Previous Message | Ireneusz Pluta | 2010-04-06 16:49:48 | Re: 3ware vs. MegaRAID |