Re: performance of bitmap scans in nested loop joins

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Sergey E(dot) Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: performance of bitmap scans in nested loop joins
Date: 2005-05-05 03:48:24
Message-ID: 18748.1115264904@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Sergey E. Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> writes:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The latter is (or should be) doing slightly *less* work, so why is it
>> taking almost twice as much time? Can you get gprof profiles of the
>> two cases?

> I've got them. I attached two files with a little bit truncated output of
> gprof.

I figured out part of the problem: I had made nodeBitmapIndexscan
re-open the index on each call, thinking that that would save amrescan
calls. But an amrescan is a whole lot cheaper than index open/close,
so that was a bad tradeoff.

This seems to account for about half of the slowdown you exhibited.
I'm not sure where the other half went ... gprof isn't turning up
any obvious candidates.

regards, tom lane

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleg Bartunov 2005-05-05 04:05:01 'infinity' in GiST index
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2005-05-05 03:33:37 Re: bitmap scan and explain analyze