Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available) - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Chris Stephens
Subject Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)
Date
Msg-id CAEFL0swTm3tyUfq5yeFV00MJ6O2VF_wqi3-kpt8jiqYPKsxpNA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)  (Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>)
Responses Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)
List pgsql-performance
we are but i was hoping to get a better understanding of where the optimizer is going wrong and what i can do about it. 

chris


On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 9:54 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:
On Mon, 2021-03-22 at 08:10 -0500, Chris Stephens wrote:
> The following SQL takes ~25 seconds to run. I'm relatively new to postgres
>  but the execution plan (https://explain.depesz.com/s/N4oR) looks like it's
>  materializing the entire EXISTS subquery for each row returned by the rest
>  of the query before probing for plate_384_id existence. postgres is
>  choosing sequential scans on sample_plate_384 and test_result when suitable,
>  efficient indexes exist. a re-written query produces a much better plan
>  (https://explain.depesz.com/s/zXJ6). Executing the EXISTS portion of the
>  query with an explicit PLATE_384_ID yields the execution plan we want as
>  well (https://explain.depesz.com/s/3QAK). unnesting the EXISTS and adding
>  a DISTINCT on the result also yields a better plan.

Great!  Then use one of the rewritten queries.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Laurenz Albe
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)
Next
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL performance issue (postgresql chooses a bad plan when a better one is available)