Re: Postgresql simple query performance question - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Reg Me Please |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Postgresql simple query performance question |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200711061515.34111.regmeplease@gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Postgresql simple query performance question ("Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
Responses |
Re: Postgresql simple query performance question
|
List | pgsql-general |
I have no doubt you're right, Pavel. But why not? It could be a simple enhacement. Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 15:11:02 Pavel Stehule ha scritto: > Hello > > PostgreSQL doesn't use index for COUN(*) > > http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/18.php > http://sql-info.de/en/postgresql/postgres-gotchas.html#1_7 > > Regards > Pavel Stehule > > On 06/11/2007, SHARMILA JOTHIRAJAH <sharmi_jo@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Hi > > We are in the process of testing for migration of our database from > > Oracle to Postgresql. > > I hava a simple query > > > > Select count(*) from foo > > This table has 29384048 rows and is indexed on foo_id > > > > The tables are vacuumed and the explain plan for postgresql is > > > > QUERY PLAN > > > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > Aggregate (cost=1194020.60..1194020.61 rows=1 width=0) (actual > > time=68797.280..68797.280 rows=1 loops=1) > > > > -> Seq Scan on foo (cost=0.00..1120560.48 rows=29384048 width=0) > > (actual > > time=0.232..60657.948 rows=29384048 loops=1) > > Total runtime: 68797.358 ms > > > > > > > > The explain plan for oracle is > > > > OPERATION OBJECT ACCESS_PREDICATES > > FILTER_PREDICATES > > ------------------- ------------------------ -------------------- > > -------------------- > > SELECT STATEMENT () (null) (null) > > (null) > > > > SORT (AGGREGATE) (null) (null) > > (null) > > > > INDEX (FULL SCAN) foo_IDX_ID (null) (null) > > > > Oracle uses index for count(*) query in this case > > This query in Oracle takes only 5 sec and in postgresql it takes 1 min > > 10sec > > > > The same query in oracle without the index and full table scan(like in > > postgresql) has the > > > > explain plan like this and it takes 34 sec. > > > > select /*+ full(foo1) */ count(*) from foo1 > > > > OPERATION OBJECT ACCESS_PREDICATES > > FILTER_PREDICATES > > ----------------------- ------------------ -------------------- > > -------------------- > > SELECT STATEMENT () (null) (null) > > (null) > > > > SORT (AGGREGATE) (null) (null) > > (null) TABLE ACCESS (FULL) foo (null) > > (null) > > > > > > In short the query "Select count(*) from foo" takes the following time: > > Postgresql - 1m 10 sec > > Oracle(index scan) - 5 sec > > Oracle (full table scan) - 34 sec > > > > How can I speed up this query in postgresql ? The other postgres settings > > are > > > > postgresql > > > > max_connections = 100 > > shared_buffers = 50000 > > temp_buffers = 5000 > > work_mem = 16384 > > maintenance_work_mem = 262144 > > fsync = on > > wal_sync_method = fsync > > effective_cache_size = 300000 > > random_page_cost = 4 > > cpu_tuple_cost = 0.01 > > cpu_index_tuple_cost = 0.001 > > cpu_operator_cost = 0.0025 > > > > Are there any tuning that need to be done in the OS or database side? I > > had attached the iostat and vmstat results of postgresql > > > > Thanks > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > ---------------------------(end of > > broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match -- Reg me Please
pgsql-general by date: