performance question (something to do w/ parameterized stmts?, wrong index types?) - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jeffrey Tenny
Subject performance question (something to do w/ parameterized stmts?, wrong index types?)
Date
Msg-id 445F7FF8.6070707@comcast.net
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: performance question (something to do w/ parameterized stmts?, wrong index types?)
Re: performance question (something to do w/
List pgsql-performance
Why does this query take so long?  (PostgreSQL 8.0.3, FC4)
Hopefully I have provided enough information below.

LOG:  statement: SELECT * FROM x WHERE f IN
($1,$2,$3,$4,$5,$6,$7,$8,$9,$10,$11,$12,$13,$14,$15,$16,$17,$18,$19,$20,$21,$22,$23,$24,\

$25,$26,$27,$28,$29,$30,$31,$32,$33,$34,$35,$36,$37,$38,$39,$40,$41,$42,$43,$44,$45,$46,$47,$48,$49,$50,$51,$52,$53,$54,$55,$56,$57,$58,$59,$60,$61,$62,$63\

,$64,$65,$66,$67,$68,$69,$70,$71,$72,$73,$74,$75,$76,$77,$78,$79,$80,$81,$82,$83,$84,$85,$86,$87,$88,$89,$90,$91,$92,$93,$94,$95,$96,$97,$98,$99,$100,$101,\

$102,$103,$104,$105,$106,$107,$108,$109,$110,$111,$112,$113,$114,$115,$116,$117,$118,$119,$120,$121,$122,$123,$124,$125,$126,$127,$128,$129,$130,$131,$132,\

$133,$134,$135,$136,$137,$138,$139,$140,$141,$142,$143,$144,$145,$146,$147,$148,$149,$150,$151,$152,$153,$154,$155,$156,$157,$158,$159,$160,$161,$162,$163,\

$164,$165,$166,$167,$168,$169,$170,$171,$172,$173,$174,$175,$176,$177,$178,$179,$180,$181,$182,$183,$184,$185,$186,$187,$188,$189,$190,$191,$192,$193,$194,\

$195,$196,$197,$198,$199,$200,$201,$202,$203,$204,$205,$206,$207,$208,$209,$210,$211,$212,$213,$214,$215,$216,$217,$218,$219,$220,$221,$222,$223,$224,$225,\

$226,$227,$228,$229,$230,$231,$232,$233,$234,$235,$236,$237,$238,$239,$240,$241,$242,$243,$244,$245,$246,$247,$248,$249,$250,$251,$252,$253,$254,$255,$256,\

$257,$258,$259,$260,$261,$262,$263,$264,$265,$266,$267,$268,$269,$270,$271,$272,$273,$274,$275,$276,$277,$278,$279,$280,$281,$282,$283,$284,$285,$286,$287,\

$288,$289,$290,$291,$292,$293,$294,$295,$296,$297,$298,$299,$300,$301,$302,$303,$304,$305,$306,$307,$308,$309,$310,$311,$312,$313,$314,$315,$316,$317,$318,\

$319,$320,$321,$322,$323,$324,$325,$326,$327,$328,$329,$330,$331,$332,$333,$334,$335,$336,$337,$338,$339,$340,$341,$342,$343,$344,$345,$346,$347,$348,$349,\

$350,$351,$352,$353,$354,$355,$356,$357,$358,$359,$360,$361,$362,$363,$364,$365,$366,$367,$368,$369,$370,$371,$372,$373,$374,$375,$376,$377,$378,$379,$380,\

$381,$382,$383,$384,$385,$386,$387,$388,$389,$390,$391,$392,$393,$394,$395,$396,$397,$398,$399,$400,$401,$402,$403,$404,$405,$406,$407,$408,$409,$410,$411,\

$412,$413,$414,$415,$416,$417,$418,$419,$420,$421,$422,$423,$424,$425,$426,$427,$428,$429,$430,$431,$432,$433,$434,$435,$436,$437,$438,$439,$440,$441,$442,\

$443,$444,$445,$446,$447,$448,$449,$450,$451,$452,$453,$454,$455,$456,$457,$458,$459,$460,$461,$462,$463,$464,$465,$466,$467,$468,$469,$470,$471,$472,$473,\

$474,$475,$476,$477,$478,$479,$480,$481,$482,$483,$484,$485,$486,$487,$488,$489,$490,$491,$492,$493,$494,$495,$496,$497,$498,$499,$500,$501,$502,$503,$504,\

$505,$506,$507,$508,$509,$510,$511,$512,$513,$514,$515,$516,$517,$518,$519,$520,$521,$522,$523,$524,$525,$526,$527,$528,$529,$530,$531,$532,$533,$534,$535,\

$536,$537,$538,$539,$540,$541,$542,$543,$544,$545,$546,$547,$548,$549,$550,$551,$552,$553,$554,$555,$556,$557,$558,$559,$560,$561,$562,$563,$564,$565,$566,\

$567,$568,$569,$570,$571,$572,$573,$574,$575,$576,$577,$578,$579,$580,$581,$582,$583,$584,$585,$586,$587,$588,$589,$590,$591,$592,$593,$594,$595,$596,$597,\

$598,$599,$600,$601,$602,$603,$604,$605,$606,$607,$608,$609,$610,$611,$612,$613,$614,$615,$616,$617,$618,$619,$620,$621,$622,$623,$624,$625,$626,$627,$628,\
$629,$630,$631,$632,$633,$634,$635,$636,$637,$638,$639,$640,$641,$642,$643,$644,$645,$646,$647,$648,$649,$650)
ORDER BY f,c

LOG:  EXECUTOR STATISTICS
DETAIL:  ! system usage stats:
         !       10.282945 elapsed 10.234444 user 0.048992 system sec
         !       [25.309152 user 0.500923 sys total]
         !       0/0 [0/0] filesystem blocks in/out
         !       0/0 [0/10397] page faults/reclaims, 0 [0] swaps
         !       0 [0] signals rcvd, 0/0 [0/0] messages rcvd/sent
         !       0/15 [291/55] voluntary/involuntary context switches
         ! buffer usage stats:
         !       Shared blocks:          0 read,          0 written,
buffer hit rate = 100.00%
         !       Local  blocks:          0 read,          0 written,
buffer hit rate = 0.00%
         !       Direct blocks:          0 read,          0 written


Here is the table description:

Table "public.x"
  Column |  Type   | Modifiers
--------+---------+-----------
  f      | integer | not null
  c      | integer | not null
  r      | integer | not null
  n      | integer | not null
Indexes:
     "x_c_idx" btree (c)
     "x_f_idx" btree (f)
     "testindex2" btree (f, c)


There are only 2,369 records in the X table.

I don't understand why this query should take 10 seconds in the executor
phase, with so little data being managed, and all relevant data already
in memory.  Any clues?

Maybe there are more database server debugging options I should have
tweaked, but I'm not sure what.  The stuff I turned on included:

log_duration = true
log_statement = 'all'
log_parser_stats = true
log_planner_stats = true
log_executor_stats = true

   (N.B. log_statement_stats = true caused the server startup failure
every time with no error message I could find, so was not deliberately set)

stats_start_collector = true
stats_command_string = true
stats_block_level = true
stats_row_level = true
stats_reset_on_server_start = true



(FYI: 10 secs is a lot only because this query is executed many times in
my application, and they're pretty much all bad, and the aggregate query
times are killing my app response).

Thanks for any tips!

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Query runs 38 seconds for small database!
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Memory and/or cache issues?