Re: Largely inconsistent query execution speed, involving psql_tmp - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: Largely inconsistent query execution speed, involving psql_tmp
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1xNuYs-2bu4_jX3ect9iT6soqPwOAjtVz0g3UBLJALzTw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Largely inconsistent query execution speed, involving psql_tmp  (Spiros Ioannou <sivann@inaccess.com>)
List pgsql-general

On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 2:47 AM, Spiros Ioannou <sivann@inaccess.com> wrote:
While executing the following query through psql :

SELECT me.* FROM measurement_events me JOIN msrcs_timestamps mt ON me.measurement_source_id=mt.measurement_source_id WHERE  measurement_time > last_update_time

there are two behaviors observed by postgresql (8.4):
1) Either the query performs lots of reads on the database and completes in about 4 hours (that is the normal-expected behavior)
2) Either the query starts filling-up pgsql_tmp and this causes large write I/O on the server, and the query never actually completes on a reasonable time (we stop it after 10h).

For some strange reason, behaviour 2 is always observed when running psql through a bash script, while behavior 1 is only observed while running psql interactively from command line (but not always).

explain:
# explain SELECT me.* FROM measurement_events me JOIN msrcs_timestamps mt ON me.measurement_source_id=mt.measurement_source_id WHERE  measurement_time > last_update_time;
                                          QUERY PLAN                                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hash Join  (cost=10111.78..422893652.69 rows=2958929695 width=103)
   Hash Cond: (me.measurement_source_id = mt.measurement_source_id)
   Join Filter: (me.measurement_time > mt.last_update_time)
   ->  Seq Scan on measurement_events me  (cost=0.00..234251772.85 rows=8876789085 width=103)
   ->  Hash  (cost=5733.57..5733.57 rows=350257 width=24)
         ->  Seq Scan on msrcs_timestamps mt  (cost=0.00..5733.57 rows=350257 width=24)
(6 rows)

Is this plan from a situation where it would probably take 4 hours, or from the situation where it would probably fail to complete in 10 hours?
 
Cheers,

Jeff

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Andy Colson
Date:
Subject: Re: Largely inconsistent query execution speed, involving psql_tmp
Next
From: Ravi Kiran
Date:
Subject: debugging with gdb in postgres