Re: Slow performance with Group By

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Erik Norvelle <signups(at)norvelle(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Slow performance with Group By
Date: 2004-11-09 00:56:04
Message-ID: 12781.1099961764@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Erik Norvelle <signups(at)norvelle(dot)org> writes:
>>> it=> explain select codelemm, sectref, count(codelemm) from indethom
> group by codelemm, sectref;
>>> QUERY PLAN
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
>>> GroupAggregate (cost=2339900.60..2444149.44 rows=1790528 width=13)
>>> -> Sort (cost=2339900.60..2364843.73 rows=9977252 width=13)
>>> Sort Key: codelemm, sectref
>>> -> Seq Scan on indethom (cost=0.00..455264.52 rows=9977252
> width=13)

Actually the painful part of that is the sort. If you bump up sort_mem
enough it will eventually switch over to a HashAggregate with no sort,
which may be a better plan if there's not too many groups (is the
estimate of 1.79 million on the mark at all??)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2004-11-09 01:31:22 Re: Question regarding the file system
Previous Message John Meinel 2004-11-09 00:31:33 Re: vacuum analyze slows sql query