Re: select max(id) from aTable is very slow - Mailing list pgsql-performance

David Teran wrote:

> Hi,
>
> we have a table with about 6.000.000 rows. There is an index on a
> column with the name id which is an integer and serves as primary key.
>
> When we execute select max(id) from theTable; it takes about 10
> seconds. Explain analyze returns:
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------------
>  Aggregate  (cost=153635.15..153635.15 rows=1 width=4) (actual
> time=9738.263..9738.264 rows=1 loops=1)
>    ->  Seq Scan on job_property  (cost=0.00..137667.32 rows=6387132
> width=4) (actual time=0.102..7303.649 rows=6387132 loops=1)
>  Total runtime: 9738.362 ms
> (3 rows)
>
>
>
> I recreated the index on column id and ran vacuum analyze
> job_property  but this did not help. I tried to force index usage
> with  SET  ENABLE_SEQSCAN TO OFF; but the explain analyze still looks
> like the  query is done using a seqscan.
>
> Is the speed more or less normal for a 'dual G5 with 2 GHZ and 4 GB
> of  Ram and a SATA hd' or do i miss something?
>
> regards David
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: 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

Try using:

SELECT id FROM theTable ORDER BY is DESC LIMIT 1;

Using COUNT, MAX, MIN and any aggregate function on the table of that
size will always result in a sequential scan. There is currently no way
around it although there are a few work arounds. See the following for
more information.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2004-01/msg00045.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2004-01/msg00054.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2004-01/msg00059.php

HTH

Nick