Hi Mike,
This is a well-known issue and to my knowledge has been addressed in
the 7.4 branch.
The recommended solution is to rephrase your query using EXISTS and
eliminating the IN (hint: may require adding a join to the query);
search pgsql-sql or pgsql-performance for details on others (this
question is posted approximately weekly.
Best,
Randall
On Thursday, May 15, 2003, at 05:44 PM, Mike Winter wrote:
> Hi, when doing queries of the type:
>
> SELECT id FROM foo WHERE id IN (1, 4, 3, 2, 10, 11, 14) .., I get
> terrible performance on tables of any resonable size. I see the
> same behaviour when doing queries of the form "SELECT id FROM
> foo WHERE id = 5 OR id = 6 OR ..."
>
> When doing an "EXPLAIN" on the query, I get output like the
> following:
>
> Index Scan using foo_idx, foo_idx, foo_idx, foo_idx, foo_idx,
> foo_idx on foo (cost=0.00..18.16 rows=6 width=4)
>
> If the "IN (1, 2, 3, 6, ..., n)" clause is big enough, the
> database will actually throw an error saying "Recursive Depth
> Exceeded" or something similar and not complete the query.
>
> It looks to me like the query parser is recursively calling
> an index scan for each row in the 'IN' clause rather than just
> doing one index scan that it seems it should be.
>
> My question is, does anyone have any alternate ideas for how I
> can do a query like this and have it perform well? The tables I
> am working with are big enough that a sequential scan is not
> helpful. Is this a bug I am encountering or an error in my
> query? Is this a known issue?
>
> I have seen this beahaviour on 7.2.1 and 7.3.2 on both Solaris
> and Linux platforms.
>
> Thanks for any input.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
