Re: Parallel Query - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: Parallel Query
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1wqPMzYoRo2zcqwqBkSd_AHnXjPWDmBRnTLFkpCwc7NXw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Parallel Query  (Luís Roberto Weck <luisroberto@siscobra.com.br>)
List pgsql-performance


On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 4:01 PM Luís Roberto Weck <luisroberto@siscobra.com.br> wrote:

Maybe PostgreSQL can't find a way to calculate having estimates?

I wasn't even thinking of the HAVING estimates I was thinking of just the raw aggregates.  It can't implement the HAVING until has the raw aggregate in hand. But, what is the actual row count without the HAVING?  Well, I notice now this line:

Rows Removed by Filter: 6787359

So the row count of rows=86 is mostly due to the HAVING, not due to the raw aggregation, a point I overlooked initially.  So the planner is not mistaken in thinking that a huge number of rows need to be passed up--it is correct in thinking that.
 
Cheers,

Jeff

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel Query
Next
From: Luís Roberto Weck
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel Query