Huge shared hit for small table - Mailing list pgsql-performance
| From | Scott Rankin |
|---|---|
| Subject | Huge shared hit for small table |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | 266BF5C6-03DC-404A-9240-00FA081BC0A0@motus.com Whole thread Raw |
| Responses |
Re: Huge shared hit for small table
(Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Re: Huge shared hit for small table (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>) Re: Huge shared hit for small table (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>) |
| List | pgsql-performance |
Hello all,
We are trying to debug some slow performance in our production environment (Amazon RDS, Postgresql 9.6.11), and we’re looking at a particular EXPLAIN node that seems… weird. This is a very large query involving a number of joins, but it performs pretty well in our staging environment (which has roughly the same data set as production, with a few tweaks). However, there is one node in the EXPLAIN plan that is wildly different:
In the staging environment, we get this:
Index Scan using "programPK" on public.program prog (cost=0.29..0.35 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.002..0.003 rows=1 loops=21965)
Output: prog.id, prog.version, prog.active, prog.created_date, prog.last_modified_date, prog.created_by, prog.last_modified_by, prog.client_id, prog.scheme_id, prog.name, prog.legacy_group_id, prog.custom_fields, prog.setup_complete, prog.setup_messages, prog.legacy_program_type
Index Cond: (prog.id = per.program)
Buffers: shared hit=87860
In the production environment, we get this:
Index Scan using "programPK" on public.program prog (cost=0.29..0.36 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.017..4.251 rows=1 loops=21956)
Output: prog.id, prog.version, prog.active, prog.created_date, prog.last_modified_date, prog.created_by, prog.last_modified_by, prog.client_id, prog.scheme_id, prog.name, prog.legacy_group_id, prog.custom_fields, prog.setup_complete, prog.setup_messages, prog.legacy_program_type
Index Cond: (prog.id = per.program)
Buffers: shared hit=25437716
The tables in both environments are about the same size (18MB) and the indexes are about the same size (360kb/410kb) – and the shared hits are pretty much the same on the other nodes of the query between the two environments.
Lastly, if we take out the join to the “program” table, the query performs much faster in production and the timing between staging and production is similar.
This has happened one time before, and we did a “REINDEX” on the program table – and that made the problem mostly go away. Now it seems to be back, and I’m not sure what to make of it.
Thanks in advance for any help you can offer!
Scott
SCOTT RANKIN
VP, Technology
Motus, LLC
Two Financial Center, 60 South Street, Boston, MA 02111
617.467.1900 (O) | srankin@motus.com
Follow us on LinkedIn | Visit us at motus.com
This email message contains information that Motus, LLC considers confidential and/or proprietary, or may later designate as confidential and proprietary. It is intended only for use of the individual or entity named above and should not be forwarded to any other persons or entities without the express consent of Motus, LLC, nor should it be used for any purpose other than in the course of any potential or actual business relationship with Motus, LLC. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy the original message.
Internal Revenue Service regulations require that certain types of written advice include a disclaimer. To the extent the preceding message contains advice relating to a Federal tax issue, unless expressly stated otherwise the advice is not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by the recipient or any other taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding Federal tax penalties, and was not written to support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter discussed herein.
pgsql-performance by date: