Re: Very slow inner join query Unacceptable latency.

On Wednesday, May 22, 2013 3:24 AM fburgess wrote:

> The SARS_ACTS table currently has 37,115,515 rows

> we have indexed: idx_sars_acts_acts_run_id ON SARS_ACTS USING btree (sars_run_id)
> we have pk constraint on the SARS_ACTS_RUN table; sars_acts_run_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id )

> serverdb=# explain select count(*) as y0_ from SARS_ACTS this_ inner join SARS_ACTS_RUN tr1_ on this_.SARS_RUN_ID=tr1_.ID where tr1_.ALGORITHM='SMAT';
> QUERY PLAN
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Aggregate (cost=4213952.17..4213952.18 rows=1 width=0)
> -> Hash Join (cost=230573.06..4213943.93 rows=3296 width=0)
> Hash Cond: (this_.SARS_RUN_ID=tr1_.ID)
> -> Seq Scan om sars_acts this_ (cost=0.00..3844241.84 rows=37092284 width=8)
> -> Hash (cost=230565.81..230565.81 rows=580 width=8)
> -> Seq Scan on sars_acts_run tr1_ (cost=0.00..230565.81 rows=580 width=8)
> Filter: ((algorithm)::text = 'SMAT'::text)
> (7 rows)

> This query executes in approximately 5.3 minutes to complete, very very slow, our users are not happy.

> I did add an index on SARS_ACTS_RUN.ALGORITHM column but it didn't improve the run time.
> The planner just changed the "Filter:" to an "Index Scan:" improving the cost of the Seq Scan
> on the sars_acts_run table, but the overall run time remained the same. It seems like the bottleneck
> is in the Seq Scan on the sars_acts table.

> -> Seq Scan on sars_acts_run tr1_ (cost=0.00..230565.81 rows=580 width=8)
> Filter: ((algorithm)::text = 'SMAT'::text)

> Does anyone have suggestions about how to speed it up?

Could you please once trying Analyzing both tables and then run the query to check which plan it uses:

Analyze SARS_ACTS;
Analyze SARS_ACTS_RUN;

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.