On 2008-02-05 Viviane Lestic wrote:
> QUERY PLAN
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sort (cost=2345.54..2345.58 rows=16 width=308) (actual
> time=270638.774..270643.142 rows=7106 loops=1)
> Sort Key: rank(tab_ocr.zoneindex_test, q.q)
> -> Nested Loop (cost=80.04..2345.22 rows=16 width=308) (actual
> time=40886.553..270619.730 rows=7106 loops=1)
> -> Nested Loop (cost=80.04..1465.76 rows=392 width=308) (actual
> time=38209.193..173932.313 rows=272414 loops=1)
> -> Function Scan on q (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=32) (actual
> time=0.006..0.007 rows=1 loops=1)
> -> Bitmap Heap Scan on tab_ocr (cost=80.04..1460.85 rows=392
> width=276) (actual time=38209.180..173507.052 rows=272414 loops=1)
> Filter: (tab_ocr.zoneindex_test @@ q.q)
> -> Bitmap Index Scan on zoneindex_test_idx (cost=0.00..79.94 rows=392
> width=0) (actual time=38204.261..38204.261 rows=283606 loops=1)
> Index Cond: (tab_ocr.zoneindex_test @@ q.q)
> -> Index Scan using tab_chemin_label_index on tab_chemin
> (cost=0.00..2.23 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=0.036..0.036 rows=0
> loops=272414)
> Index Cond: (tab_ocr.idstruct = tab_chemin.label)
> Filter: ((chemin)::text ~~ '%;2;%'::text)
> Total runtime: 270647.946 ms
> **************************************************************************
>
> Could someone help me analyze this problem?
Your planner estimates are way off. Try increasing the statistics target
for the columns used in this query and re-analyze the tables after doing
so.
Regards
Ansgar Wiechers
--
"The Mac OS X kernel should never panic because, when it does, it
seriously inconveniences the user."
--http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn2004/tn2118.html
