Fwd: Help with view performance problem - Mailing list pgsql-performance
From | Chris Hoover |
---|---|
Subject | Fwd: Help with view performance problem |
Date | |
Msg-id | 1d219a6f0507280738791f0ea3@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
Responses |
Re: Fwd: Help with view performance problem
|
List | pgsql-performance |
Does anyone have any suggestions on this? I did not get any response from the admin list. Thanks, Chris ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Chris Hoover <revoohc@gmail.com> Date: Jul 27, 2005 12:29 PM Subject: Re: Help with view performance problem To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org I did some more testing, and ran the explain analyze on the problem. In my session I did a set enable_hashjoin = false and then ran the analyze. This caused it to use the indexes as I have been expecting it to do. Now, how can I get it to use the indexes w/o manipulating the environment? What make postgresql want to sequentially scan and use a hash join? thanks, Chris explain analyze with set_hashjoin=false; prob_db=#explain analyze select * from clm_com; QUERY PLAN ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subquery Scan clm_com (cost=1057975.45..1169021.26 rows=126910 width=366) (actual time=142307.99..225997.22 rows=1268649 loops=1) -> Unique (cost=1057975.45..1169021.26 rows=126910 width=366) (actual time=142307.96..206082.30 rows=1268649 loops=1) -> Sort (cost=1057975.45..1061148.19 rows=1269095 width=366) (actual time=142307.95..156019.01 rows=1268649 loops=1) Sort Key: clmcom1.inv_nbr, clmcom1.inv_qfr, clmcom1.pat_addr_1, clmcom1.pat_addr_2, clmcom1.pat_city, clmcom1.pat_cntry, clmcom1.pat_dob, clmcom1.pat_gender_cd, clmcom1.pat_info_pregnancy_ind, clmcom1.pat_state, clmcom1.pat_suffix, clmcom1.pat_zip, clmcom1.payto_addr_1, clmcom1.payto_addr_2, clmcom1.payto_city, clmcom1.payto_cntry, clmcom1.payto_f_name, clmcom1.payto_m_name, clmcom1.payto_state, clmcom1.payto_zip, clmcom1.clm_tot_clm_chgs, clmcom1.bill_l_name_org, clmcom1.clm_delay_rsn_cd, clmcom1.clm_submit_rsn_cd, clmcom1.payto_l_name_org, clmcom1.payto_prim_id, clmcom1.bill_prim_id, clmcom1.clm_tot_ncov_chgs, clmcom2.contract_amt, clmcom2.svc_fac_or_lab_name, clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_1, clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_2, clmcom2.svc_fac_city, clmcom2.svc_fac_zip -> Merge Join (cost=0.00..565541.46 rows=1269095 width=366) (actual time=464.89..130638.06 rows=1268649 loops=1) Merge Cond: ("outer".inv_nbr = "inner".inv_nbr) Join Filter: ("outer".inv_qfr = "inner".inv_qfr) -> Index Scan using clmcom1_inv_nbr_iview_idx on clmcom1 (cost=0.00..380534.32 rows=1269095 width=270) (actual time=0.27..82159.37 rows=1268649 loops=1) -> Index Scan using clmcom2_inv_nbr_iview_idx on clmcom2 (cost=0.00..159636.25 rows=1271198 width=96) (actual time=464.56..21774.02 rows=1494019 loops=1) Total runtime: 227369.39 msec (10 rows) On 7/27/05, Chris Hoover <revoohc@gmail.com> wrote: > I am having a problem with a view on one of my db's. This view is > trying to sequentially can the 2 tables it is accessing. However, > when I explain the view on most of my other db's (all have the same > schema's), it is using the indexes. Can anyone please help me > understand why postgres is choosing to sequenially scan both tables? > > Both tables in the view have a primary key defined on inv_nbr, > inv_qfr. Vacuum and analyze have been run on the tables in question > to try and make sure stats are up to date. > > Thanks, > > Chris > PG - 7.3.4 > RH 2.1 > > > Here is the view definition: > SELECT DISTINCT clmcom1.inv_nbr AS inventory_number, > clmcom1.inv_qfr AS inventory_qualifier, > clmcom1.pat_addr_1 AS patient_address_1, > clmcom1.pat_addr_2 AS patient_address_2, > clmcom1.pat_city AS patient_city, > clmcom1.pat_cntry AS patient_country, > clmcom1.pat_dob AS patient_date_of_birth, > clmcom1.pat_gender_cd AS patient_gender_code, > clmcom1.pat_info_pregnancy_ind AS pregnancy_ind, > clmcom1.pat_state AS patient_state, > clmcom1.pat_suffix AS patient_suffix, > clmcom1.pat_zip AS patient_zip_code, > clmcom1.payto_addr_1 AS payto_address_1, > clmcom1.payto_addr_2 AS payto_address_2, > clmcom1.payto_city, > clmcom1.payto_cntry AS payto_country, > clmcom1.payto_f_name AS payto_first_name, > clmcom1.payto_m_name AS payto_middle_name, > clmcom1.payto_state, > clmcom1.payto_zip AS payto_zip_code, > clmcom1.clm_tot_clm_chgs AS total_claim_charge, > clmcom1.bill_l_name_org AS > billing_last_name_or_org, > clmcom1.clm_delay_rsn_cd AS > claim_delay_reason_code, > clmcom1.clm_submit_rsn_cd AS > claim_submit_reason_code, > clmcom1.payto_l_name_org AS > payto_last_name_or_org, > clmcom1.payto_prim_id AS payto_primary_id, > clmcom1.bill_prim_id AS billing_prov_primary_id, > clmcom1.clm_tot_ncov_chgs AS total_ncov_charge, > clmcom2.contract_amt AS contract_amount, > clmcom2.svc_fac_or_lab_name, > clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_1 AS svc_fac_address_1, > clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_2 AS svc_fac_address_2, > clmcom2.svc_fac_city, > clmcom2.svc_fac_zip AS svc_fac_zip_code > FROM (clmcom1 LEFT JOIN clmcom2 ON (((clmcom1.inv_nbr = > clmcom2.inv_nbr) AND > > (clmcom1.inv_qfr = clmcom2.inv_qfr)))) > ORDER BY clmcom1.inv_nbr, > clmcom1.inv_qfr, > clmcom1.pat_addr_1, > clmcom1.pat_addr_2, > clmcom1.pat_city, > clmcom1.pat_cntry, > clmcom1.pat_dob, > clmcom1.pat_gender_cd, > clmcom1.pat_info_pregnancy_ind, > clmcom1.pat_state, > clmcom1.pat_suffix, > clmcom1.pat_zip, > clmcom1.payto_addr_1, > clmcom1.payto_addr_2, > clmcom1.payto_city, > clmcom1.payto_cntry, > clmcom1.payto_f_name, > clmcom1.payto_m_name, > clmcom1.payto_state, > clmcom1.payto_zip, > clmcom1.clm_tot_clm_chgs, > clmcom1.bill_l_name_org, > clmcom1.clm_delay_rsn_cd, > clmcom1.clm_submit_rsn_cd, > clmcom1.payto_l_name_org, > clmcom1.payto_prim_id, > clmcom1.bill_prim_id, > clmcom1.clm_tot_ncov_chgs, > clmcom2.contract_amt, > clmcom2.svc_fac_or_lab_name, > clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_1, > clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_2, > clmcom2.svc_fac_city, > clmcom2.svc_fac_zip; > > > Here is the explain analyze from the problem db: > prob_db=# explain analyze select * from clm_com; > > > > QUERY PLAN > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Subquery Scan clm_com (cost=1039824.35..1150697.61 rows=126712 > width=367) (actual time=311792.78..405819.03 rows=1266114 loops=1) > -> Unique (cost=1039824.35..1150697.61 rows=126712 width=367) > (actual time=311792.74..386313.14 rows=1266114 loops=1) > -> Sort (cost=1039824.35..1042992.16 rows=1267123 > width=367) (actual time=311792.74..338189.48 rows=1266114 loops=1) > Sort Key: clmcom1.inv_nbr, clmcom1.inv_qfr, > clmcom1.pat_addr_1, clmcom1.pat_addr_2, clmcom1.pat_city, > clmcom1.pat_cntry, clmcom1.pat_dob, clmcom1.pat_gender_cd, > clmcom1.pat_info_pregnancy_ind, clmcom1.pat_state, clmcom1.pat_suffix, > clmcom1.pat_zip, clmcom1.payto_addr_1, > clmcom1.payto_addr_2, clmcom1.payto_city, clmcom1.payto_cntry, > clmcom1.payto_f_name, clmcom1.payto_m_name, clmcom1.payto_state, > clmcom1.payto_zip, clmcom1.clm_tot_clm_chgs, clmcom1.bill_l_name_org, > clmcom1.clm_delay_rsn_cd, clmcom1.clm_submit_rsn_cd, > clmcom1.payto_l_name_org, clmcom1.payto_prim_id, clmcom1.bill_prim_id, > clmcom1.clm_tot_ncov_chgs, clmcom2.contract_amt, > clmcom2.svc_fac_or_lab_name, clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_1, > clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_2, clmcom2.svc_fac_city, clmcom2.svc_fac_zip > -> Hash Join (cost=132972.78..548171.70 rows=1267123 > width=367) (actual time=16999.32..179359.43 rows=1266114 loops=1) > Hash Cond: ("outer".inv_nbr = "inner".inv_nbr) > Join Filter: ("outer".inv_qfr = "inner".inv_qfr) > -> Seq Scan on clmcom1 (cost=0.00..267017.23 > rows=1267123 width=271) (actual time=0.11..84711.83 rows=1266114 > loops=1) > -> Hash (cost=111200.82..111200.82 rows=1269582 > width=96) (actual time=16987.45..16987.45 rows=0 loops=1) > -> Seq Scan on clmcom2 > (cost=0.00..111200.82 rows=1269582 width=96) (actual > time=0.07..12164.81 rows=1266108 loops=1) > Total runtime: 407317.47 msec > (11 rows) > ~ > > > > Here is the explain analyze from a good db (on the same postgres cluster); > good_db=# explain analyze select * from clm_com; > > > > > > QUERY PLAN > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Subquery Scan clm_com (cost=78780.59..89498.29 rows=12249 width=359) > (actual time=73045.36..79974.37 rows=122494 loops=1) > -> Unique (cost=78780.59..89498.29 rows=12249 width=359) (actual > time=73045.28..78031.99 rows=122494 loops=1) > -> Sort (cost=78780.59..79086.81 rows=122488 width=359) > (actual time=73045.28..73362.94 rows=122494 loops=1) > Sort Key: clmcom1.inv_nbr, clmcom1.inv_qfr, > clmcom1.pat_addr_1, clmcom1.pat_addr_2, clmcom1.pat_city, > clmcom1.pat_cntry, clmcom1.pat_dob, clmcom1.pat_gender_cd, > clmcom1.pat_info_pregnancy_ind, clmcom1.pat_state, clmcom1.pat_suffix, > clmcom1.pat_zip, clmcom1.payto_addr_1, clmcom1.payto_addr_2, > clmcom1.payto_city, clmcom1.payto_cntry, clmcom1.payto_f_name, > clmcom1.payto_m_name, clmcom1.payto_state, clmcom1.payto_zip, > clmcom1.clm_tot_clm_chgs, clmcom1.bill_l_name_org, > clmcom1.clm_delay_rsn_cd, clmcom1.clm_submit_rsn_cd, > clmcom1.payto_l_name_org, clmcom1.payto_prim_id, clmcom1.bill_prim_id, > clmcom1.clm_tot_ncov_chgs, clmcom2.contract_amt, > clmcom2.svc_fac_or_lab_name, clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_1, > clmcom2.svc_fac_addr_2, clmcom2.svc_fac_city, clmcom2.svc_fac_zip > -> Merge Join (cost=0.00..56945.12 rows=122488 > width=359) (actual time=54.76..71635.65 rows=122494 loops=1) > Merge Cond: (("outer".inv_nbr = "inner".inv_nbr) > AND ("outer".inv_qfr = "inner".inv_qfr)) > -> Index Scan using clmcom1_pkey on clmcom1 > (cost=0.00..38645.61 rows=122488 width=267) (actual > time=25.60..49142.16 rows=122494 loops=1) > -> Index Scan using clmcom2_pkey on clmcom2 > (cost=0.00..16004.08 rows=122488 width=92) (actual > time=29.09..19418.94 rows=122494 loops=1) > Total runtime: 80162.26 msec > (9 rows) >
pgsql-performance by date: