Re: plan not correct? - Mailing list pgsql-sql
From | Adrian Klaver |
---|---|
Subject | Re: plan not correct? |
Date | |
Msg-id | 56F01B8F.5030506@aklaver.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | plan not correct? (Bert <biertie@gmail.com>) |
List | pgsql-sql |
On 03/21/2016 08:29 AM, Bert wrote: > That is easy to check. > > Let's do the same test again: > # select count(1) from dlp.st_itemseat; > count > ------- > 12 > (1 row) > > # select count(1) from loaddlp.st_itemseat_insert; > count > ------- > 87 --> of which 12 are already in the dlp.st_itemseat table > (1 row) > > # explain analyze <upsert query>* > QUERY PLAN > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Insert on st_itemseat (cost=55.47..69.97 rows=150 width=228) (actual > time=2.345..2.345 rows=0 loops=1) > CTE upsert > -> Update on st_itemseat et (cost=17.50..55.42 rows=2 width=240) > (actual time=0.493..0.545 rows=12 loops=1) > -> Hash Join (cost=17.50..55.42 rows=2 width=240) (actual > time=0.303..0.318 rows=12 loops=1) > Hash Cond: ((et.tick_server_id = > st_itemseat_insert_1.tick_server_id) AND (et.itemseat_id = > st_itemseat_insert_1.itemseat_id)) > -> Seq Scan on st_itemseat et (cost=0.00..13.10 > rows=310 width=14) (actual time=0.025..0.028 rows=12 loops=1) > -> Hash (cost=13.00..13.00 rows=300 width=234) > (actual time=0.244..0.244 rows=87 loops=1) > Buckets: 1024 Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 13kB > -> Seq Scan on st_itemseat_insert > st_itemseat_insert_1 (cost=0.00..13.00 rows=300 width=234) (actual > time=0.005..0.120 rows=87 loops=1) > -> Seq Scan on st_itemseat_insert (cost=0.04..14.54 rows=150 > width=228) (actual time=0.637..0.726 rows=75 loops=1) > Filter: (NOT (hashed SubPlan 2)) > Rows Removed by Filter: 12 > SubPlan 2 > -> CTE Scan on upsert (cost=0.00..0.04 rows=2 width=8) > (actual time=0.498..0.561 rows=12 loops=1) > Planning time: 1.122 ms > Execution time: 2.682 ms > > # <upsert query>* > INSERT 0 0 > > # select count(1) from dlp.st_itemseat; > count > ------- > 87 > (1 row) > > > * the upsert query can be found attached to the first mail, but the > difference is that the 'where loadtabletime' is removed > > As you can see the in the update part of the explain the 'rows' nr is > 12. Which is what is expected. > But the rows on the insert are again 0, while it should be 75. They are seen, including the 12 rows that are filtered out for updating: " -> Seq Scan on st_itemseat_insert (cost=0.04..14.54 rows=150 width=228) (actual time=0.637..0.726 rows=75 loops=1) Filter: (NOT (hashed SubPlan 2)) Rows Removed by Filter:12 SubPlan 2 " I do not know why that value is not propagated up to 'Insert on st_itemseat ...'. > > wkr, > Bert > -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com