Thread: Unable to match same value in field.
Hello,
I using postgresql 9.5.1 and I have problem to match value in one field.
Both tables are text:
=# \d list_cards_tbl;
Column | Type | Modifiers
-----------+---------+--------------------------------------------------------------
recid | integer | not null default
nextval('list_cards_tbl_recid_seq'::regclass)
imsi | text |
Indexes:
"imsi_list_cards_tbl" btree (imsi)
=# \d list_newcard_tbl;
Column | Type | Modifiers
------------+---------+---------------------------------------------------------------
recid | integer | not null default
nextval('list_newcard_tbl_recid_seq'::regclass)
serial | text |
imsi | text |
Indexes:
"list_newcard_tbl_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (recid)
"list_newcard_ser_idx" btree (serial)
=# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_newcards_tbl where
imsi = '284110000123315';
imsi | md5 | bit_length
-----------------+----------------------------------+------------
284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
(1 row)
So far so good, value of table list_newcard_tbl is fine, problem is in
table list_cards_tbl
=# select imsi from list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
imsi
------
(0 rows)
No value, lets change to LIKE
=# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
imsi like '284110000123315%';
imsi | md5 | bit_length
-----------------+----------------------------------+------------
284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
(1 row)
Both have the same MD5 sum, also bit length.
With EXPLAIN:
=# explain analyse select imsi from list_cards_tbl where imsi =
'284110000123315';
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Index Only Scan using imsi_list_card_tbl on list_cards_tbl
(cost=0.28..4.30 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.021..0.021 rows=0
loops=1)
Index Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
Heap Fetches: 0
Planning time: 0.080 ms
Execution time: 0.045 ms
(5 rows)
I see only index scan, so I do:
=# reindex table list_cards_tbl;
REINDEX
=# vacuum list_cards_tbl;
VACUUM
=# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
imsi = '284110000123315';
imsi | md5 | bit_length
------+-----+------------
(0 rows)
Still cant find value.
Some settings:
enable_bitmapscan | on
| Enables the planner's use of bitmap-scan plans.
enable_hashagg | on
| Enables the planner's use of hashed aggregation
plans.
enable_hashjoin | on
| Enables the planner's use of hash join plans.
enable_indexonlyscan | on
| Enables the planner's use of index-only-scan
plans.
enable_indexscan | on
| Enables the planner's use of index-scan plans.
enable_material | on
| Enables the planner's use of materialization.
enable_mergejoin | on
| Enables the planner's use of merge join plans.
enable_nestloop | on
| Enables the planner's use of nested-loop join
plans.
enable_seqscan | on
| Enables the planner's use of sequential-scan
plans.
enable_sort | on
| Enables the planner's use of explicit sort steps.
enable_tidscan | on
| Enables the planner's use of TID scan plans.
client_encoding | UTF8
| Sets the client's character set encoding.
lc_collate | bg_BG.utf8
| Shows the collation order locale.
lc_ctype | bg_BG.utf8
| Shows the character classification and case
conversion locale.
lc_messages | bg_BG.utf8
| Sets the language in which messages are
displayed.
lc_monetary | bg_BG.utf8
| Sets the locale for formatting monetary amounts.
lc_numeric | bg_BG.utf8
| Sets the locale for formatting numbers.
lc_time | bg_BG.utf8
| Sets the locale for formatting date and time
values.
server_encoding | UTF8
| Sets the server (database) character set
encoding.
server_version | 9.5.1
| Shows the server version.
server_version_num | 90501
| Shows the server version as an integer.
Can some one point me what can be the problem with this value and how to
resolve it ? I think probably index problem but I reindex that table and
problem is not resolved or some broken utf8 char but md5 and bit_length
should not to be equal.
Regards,
HS
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 11:09:00AM +0200, Condor wrote: > Can some one point me what can be the problem with this value and how to > resolve it ? I think probably index problem but I reindex that table and > problem is not resolved For the fun of it try dropping all indexes on the table and rerun the query. Karsten -- GPG key ID E4071346 @ eu.pool.sks-keyservers.net E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346
On 03/10/2016 01:09 AM, Condor wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I using postgresql 9.5.1 and I have problem to match value in one field.
> Both tables are text:
>
> =# \d list_cards_tbl;
>
> Column | Type | Modifiers
> -----------+---------+--------------------------------------------------------------
>
> recid | integer | not null default
> nextval('list_cards_tbl_recid_seq'::regclass)
> imsi | text |
> Indexes:
> "imsi_list_cards_tbl" btree (imsi)
>
>
> =# \d list_newcard_tbl;
> Column | Type | Modifiers
> ------------+---------+---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> recid | integer | not null default
> nextval('list_newcard_tbl_recid_seq'::regclass)
> serial | text |
> imsi | text |
> Indexes:
> "list_newcard_tbl_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (recid)
> "list_newcard_ser_idx" btree (serial)
>
>
>
> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_newcards_tbl where
> imsi = '284110000123315';
> imsi | md5 | bit_length
> -----------------+----------------------------------+------------
> 284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
> (1 row)
>
>
>
> So far so good, value of table list_newcard_tbl is fine, problem is in
> table list_cards_tbl
>
> =# select imsi from list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
> imsi
> ------
> (0 rows)
>
> No value, lets change to LIKE
>
> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
> imsi like '284110000123315%';
> imsi | md5 | bit_length
> -----------------+----------------------------------+------------
> 284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
> (1 row)
>
>
> Both have the same MD5 sum, also bit length.
>
> With EXPLAIN:
>
> =# explain analyse select imsi from list_cards_tbl where imsi =
> '284110000123315';
> QUERY PLAN
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Index Only Scan using imsi_list_card_tbl on list_cards_tbl
> (cost=0.28..4.30 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.021..0.021 rows=0 loops=1)
> Index Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
> Heap Fetches: 0
> Planning time: 0.080 ms
> Execution time: 0.045 ms
> (5 rows)
>
> I see only index scan, so I do:
>
> =# reindex table list_cards_tbl;
> REINDEX
> =# vacuum list_cards_tbl;
> VACUUM
> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
> imsi = '284110000123315';
> imsi | md5 | bit_length
> ------+-----+------------
> (0 rows)
>
>
> Still cant find value.
>
So is the above the only value that is hidden?
What happens if for a session you do?:
SET enable_indexonlyscan=OFF;
Basically a variation of Karsten's idea
Is the same process populating both tables?
Where is the data coming from?
Lastly, what happens if you populate the field in list_cards_tbl with
the data from list_newcards_tbl?
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
On 10-03-2016 15:37, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 03/10/2016 01:09 AM, Condor wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I using postgresql 9.5.1 and I have problem to match value in one
>> field.
>> Both tables are text:
>>
>> =# \d list_cards_tbl;
>>
>> Column | Type | Modifiers
>> -----------+---------+--------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> recid | integer | not null default
>> nextval('list_cards_tbl_recid_seq'::regclass)
>> imsi | text |
>> Indexes:
>> "imsi_list_cards_tbl" btree (imsi)
>>
>>
>> =# \d list_newcard_tbl;
>> Column | Type | Modifiers
>> ------------+---------+---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> recid | integer | not null default
>> nextval('list_newcard_tbl_recid_seq'::regclass)
>> serial | text |
>> imsi | text |
>> Indexes:
>> "list_newcard_tbl_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (recid)
>> "list_newcard_ser_idx" btree (serial)
>>
>>
>>
>> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_newcards_tbl
>> where
>> imsi = '284110000123315';
>> imsi | md5 | bit_length
>> -----------------+----------------------------------+------------
>> 284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
>> (1 row)
>>
>>
>>
>> So far so good, value of table list_newcard_tbl is fine, problem is in
>> table list_cards_tbl
>>
>> =# select imsi from list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
>> imsi
>> ------
>> (0 rows)
>>
>> No value, lets change to LIKE
>>
>> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
>> imsi like '284110000123315%';
>> imsi | md5 | bit_length
>> -----------------+----------------------------------+------------
>> 284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
>> (1 row)
>>
>>
>> Both have the same MD5 sum, also bit length.
>>
>> With EXPLAIN:
>>
>> =# explain analyse select imsi from list_cards_tbl where imsi =
>> '284110000123315';
>> QUERY
>> PLAN
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Index Only Scan using imsi_list_card_tbl on list_cards_tbl
>> (cost=0.28..4.30 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.021..0.021 rows=0
>> loops=1)
>> Index Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
>> Heap Fetches: 0
>> Planning time: 0.080 ms
>> Execution time: 0.045 ms
>> (5 rows)
>>
>> I see only index scan, so I do:
>>
>> =# reindex table list_cards_tbl;
>> REINDEX
>> =# vacuum list_cards_tbl;
>> VACUUM
>> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
>> imsi = '284110000123315';
>> imsi | md5 | bit_length
>> ------+-----+------------
>> (0 rows)
>>
>>
>> Still cant find value.
>>
>
> So is the above the only value that is hidden?
>
> What happens if for a session you do?:
>
> SET enable_indexonlyscan=OFF;
>
> Basically a variation of Karsten's idea
>
> Is the same process populating both tables?
>
> Where is the data coming from?
>
> Lastly, what happens if you populate the field in list_cards_tbl with
> the data from list_newcards_tbl?
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
=# SET enable_indexonlyscan=OFF;
SET
=# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
imsi = '284110000123315';
imsi | md5 | bit_length
------+-----+------------
(0 rows)
=# explain analyse select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from
list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
QUERY PLAN
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Index Scan using imsi_list_cards_tbl on list_cards_tbl
(cost=0.28..8.30 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.015..0.015 rows=0
loops=1)
Index Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
Planning time: 0.106 ms
Execution time: 0.040 ms
(4 rows)
Same result.
=# SET enable_indexscan = off;
SET
=# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
imsi = '284110000123315';
imsi | md5 | bit_length
------+-----+------------
(0 rows)
=# explain analyse select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from
list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bitmap Heap Scan on list_cards_tbl (cost=4.29..8.31 rows=1 width=16)
(actual time=0.016..0.016 rows=0 loops=1)
Recheck Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
-> Bitmap Index Scan on imsi_list_cards_tbl (cost=0.00..4.29 rows=1
width=0) (actual time=0.015..0.015 rows=0 loops=1)
Index Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
Planning time: 0.109 ms
Execution time: 0.046 ms
(6 rows)
Finally.
=# SET enable_bitmapscan = off
SET
=# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
imsi = '284110000123315';
imsi | md5 | bit_length
-----------------+----------------------------------+------------
284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
(1 row)
=# explain analyse select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from
list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seq Scan on list_cards_tbl (cost=0.00..78.08 rows=1 width=16) (actual
time=0.053..0.502 rows=1 loops=1)
Filter: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
Rows Removed by Filter: 2485
Planning time: 0.127 ms
Execution time: 0.533 ms
(5 rows)
I will drop index and will create them again but after rebuild I think
if there are mistakes after rebuild they should be fixed ?
Process that populate them isnt the same but data is coming from
database not from user input filed.
Any ideas ?
HS
On 03/11/2016 12:19 AM, Condor wrote:
> On 10-03-2016 15:37, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>> On 03/10/2016 01:09 AM, Condor wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I using postgresql 9.5.1 and I have problem to match value in one field.
>>> Both tables are text:
>>>
>>> =# \d list_cards_tbl;
>>>
>>> Column | Type | Modifiers
>>> -----------+---------+--------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> recid | integer | not null default
>>> nextval('list_cards_tbl_recid_seq'::regclass)
>>> imsi | text |
>>> Indexes:
>>> "imsi_list_cards_tbl" btree (imsi)
>>>
>>>
>>> =# \d list_newcard_tbl;
>>> Column | Type | Modifiers
>>> ------------+---------+---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> recid | integer | not null default
>>> nextval('list_newcard_tbl_recid_seq'::regclass)
>>> serial | text |
>>> imsi | text |
>>> Indexes:
>>> "list_newcard_tbl_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (recid)
>>> "list_newcard_ser_idx" btree (serial)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_newcards_tbl where
>>> imsi = '284110000123315';
>>> imsi | md5 | bit_length
>>> -----------------+----------------------------------+------------
>>> 284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
>>> (1 row)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So far so good, value of table list_newcard_tbl is fine, problem is in
>>> table list_cards_tbl
>>>
>>> =# select imsi from list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
>>> imsi
>>> ------
>>> (0 rows)
>>>
>>> No value, lets change to LIKE
>>>
>>> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
>>> imsi like '284110000123315%';
>>> imsi | md5 | bit_length
>>> -----------------+----------------------------------+------------
>>> 284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
>>> (1 row)
>>>
>>>
>>> Both have the same MD5 sum, also bit length.
>>>
>>> With EXPLAIN:
>>>
>>> =# explain analyse select imsi from list_cards_tbl where imsi =
>>> '284110000123315';
>>> QUERY
>>> PLAN
>>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> Index Only Scan using imsi_list_card_tbl on list_cards_tbl
>>> (cost=0.28..4.30 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.021..0.021 rows=0
>>> loops=1)
>>> Index Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
>>> Heap Fetches: 0
>>> Planning time: 0.080 ms
>>> Execution time: 0.045 ms
>>> (5 rows)
>>>
>>> I see only index scan, so I do:
>>>
>>> =# reindex table list_cards_tbl;
>>> REINDEX
>>> =# vacuum list_cards_tbl;
>>> VACUUM
>>> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
>>> imsi = '284110000123315';
>>> imsi | md5 | bit_length
>>> ------+-----+------------
>>> (0 rows)
>>>
>>>
>>> Still cant find value.
>>>
>>
>> So is the above the only value that is hidden?
>>
>> What happens if for a session you do?:
>>
>> SET enable_indexonlyscan=OFF;
>>
>> Basically a variation of Karsten's idea
>>
>> Is the same process populating both tables?
>>
>> Where is the data coming from?
>>
>> Lastly, what happens if you populate the field in list_cards_tbl with
>> the data from list_newcards_tbl?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Adrian Klaver
>> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
>
>
> =# SET enable_indexonlyscan=OFF;
> SET
> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
> imsi = '284110000123315';
> imsi | md5 | bit_length
> ------+-----+------------
> (0 rows)
>
>
> =# explain analyse select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from
> list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
> QUERY PLAN
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Index Scan using imsi_list_cards_tbl on list_cards_tbl
> (cost=0.28..8.30 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.015..0.015 rows=0 loops=1)
> Index Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
> Planning time: 0.106 ms
> Execution time: 0.040 ms
> (4 rows)
>
>
> Same result.
>
> =# SET enable_indexscan = off;
> SET
> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
> imsi = '284110000123315';
> imsi | md5 | bit_length
> ------+-----+------------
> (0 rows)
>
> =# explain analyse select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from
> list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
> QUERY PLAN
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Bitmap Heap Scan on list_cards_tbl (cost=4.29..8.31 rows=1 width=16)
> (actual time=0.016..0.016 rows=0 loops=1)
> Recheck Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
> -> Bitmap Index Scan on imsi_list_cards_tbl (cost=0.00..4.29
> rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.015..0.015 rows=0 loops=1)
> Index Cond: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
> Planning time: 0.109 ms
> Execution time: 0.046 ms
> (6 rows)
>
>
> Finally.
>
>
> =# SET enable_bitmapscan = off
> SET
> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where
> imsi = '284110000123315';
> imsi | md5 | bit_length
> -----------------+----------------------------------+------------
> 284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
> (1 row)
>
> =# explain analyse select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from
> list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
> QUERY PLAN
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Seq Scan on list_cards_tbl (cost=0.00..78.08 rows=1 width=16) (actual
> time=0.053..0.502 rows=1 loops=1)
> Filter: (imsi = '284110000123315'::text)
> Rows Removed by Filter: 2485
> Planning time: 0.127 ms
> Execution time: 0.533 ms
> (5 rows)
>
>
>
> I will drop index and will create them again but after rebuild I think
> if there are mistakes after rebuild they should be fixed ?
Yes that seems to be confirmed here:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/interactive/sql-reindex.html
"REINDEX is similar to a drop and recreate of the index in that the
index contents are rebuilt from scratch. ... "
> Process that populate them isnt the same but data is coming from
> database not from user input filed.
>
> Any ideas ?
Not at the moment, but some unanswered questions:
Is '284110000123315' the only value you are having issues with?
What happens if you populate the field in list_cards_tbl with
the data from list_newcards_tbl?
>
>
> HS
>
>
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
On 03/12/2016 08:11 AM, Condor wrote: Ccing list >>>> On 03/10/2016 01:09 AM, Condor wrote: >> >>> Process that populate them isnt the same but data is coming from >>> database not from user input filed. >>> >>> Any ideas ? >> >> Not at the moment, but some unanswered questions: >> >> Is '284110000123315' the only value you are having issues with? > > Yes, I now make some tests, it's seems that is the only value that make > troubles. > >> >> What happens if you populate the field in list_cards_tbl with >> the data from list_newcards_tbl? >> > > Everything is work. I update value with '284110000123315' manual (I just > select value with like and update it) and then rerun query and server > now found that data. > Yes, I can do that in first moment but was very strange for me why after > rebuild value still cant be find when md5 and bit_length prove that is > the same string. I do not know, that is why I Cced list, maybe someone else has an idea. > > Any way, problem solved. > > HS > > > > -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
On 2016-03-10 11:09:00 +0200, Condor wrote:
> I using postgresql 9.5.1 and I have problem to match value in one field.
> Both tables are text:
[...]
> =# select imsi from list_cards_tbl where imsi = '284110000123315';
> imsi
> ------
> (0 rows)
>
> No value, lets change to LIKE
>
> =# select imsi, md5(imsi), bit_length(imsi) from list_cards_tbl where imsi
> like '284110000123315%';
> imsi | md5 | bit_length
> -----------------+----------------------------------+------------
> 284110000123315 | b438e984c97483bb942eaaed5c0147f3 | 120
> (1 row)
That looks familiar. I think I've seen something similar recently. That
was on 9.5beta1 (I haven't gotten around to upgrade to 9.5.1 yet).
> =# reindex table list_cards_tbl;
> REINDEX
[...]
> Still cant find value.
Dropping and recreating the index helped in my case. Still, I find it
worrying if a value which obviously is in the table can't be found using
the index.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | I want to forget all about both belts and
|_|_) | | suspenders; instead, I want to buy pants
| | | hjp@hjp.at | that actually fit.
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- http://noncombatant.org/