Mark Stosberg <mark(at)summersault(dot)com> writes:
> I'm not skilled enough at reading the "Explain Analzyze" output to
> understand what the primary problem is.
The problem is the repeated execution of the subquery in the SELECT
list; that's taking over 683 of the 686 seconds:
> -> Aggregate (cost=2162.60..2162.61 rows=1
> width=0) (actual time=21.073..21.073 rows=1 loops=32424)
The current formulation of the query guarantees that you can't do better
than a nestloop join with "sub" on the inside, and that nestloop isn't
even indexed. See if you can convert it to a regular join instead of a
sub-select (probably with GROUP BY instead of DISTINCT).
Also, those LIKE conditions are just horrid: slow *and* unreadable.
Consider redesigning your data representation. Perhaps converting
info_responsible to an int array would be reasonable.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-sql by date
|Next:||From: dipesh||Date: 2008-07-07 09:13:15|
|Subject: How to find space occupied by postgres on harddisk|
|Previous:||From: Mark Stosberg||Date: 2008-07-06 20:26:51|
|Subject: Re: Egroupware infolog query slow (includes query plan)|