Re: Simple queries take forever to run

From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
To: Michael Guerin <guerin(at)rentec(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Simple queries take forever to run
Date: 2003-08-28 15:19:53
Message-ID: 20030828081914.A6403-100000@megazone.bigpanda.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Michael Guerin wrote:

> Stephan Szabo wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Michael Guerin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>I'm running into some performance problems trying to execute simple
> >>queries.
> >>
> >>postgresql version 7.3.3
> >>.conf params changed from defaults.
> >>shared_buffers = 64000
> >>sort_mem = 64000
> >>fsync = false
> >>effective_cache_size = 400000
> >>
> >>ex. query: select * from x where id in (select id from y);
> >>
> >>There's an index on each table for id. SQL Server takes <1s to return,
> >>postgresql doesn't return at all, neither does explain analyze.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >IN(subquery) is known to run poorly in 7.3.x and earlier. 7.4 is
> >generally much better (for reasonably sized subqueries) but in earlier
> >versions you'll probably want to convert into an EXISTS or join form.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Something else seems to be going on, even switching to an exists clause
> gives much better but poor performance.
> count(*) where exists clause: Postgresql 19s, SQL Server <1s
> count(*) where not exists: 23.3s SQL Server 1.5s

What does explain analyze show for the two queries?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message scott.marlowe 2003-08-28 15:33:15 Re: Hardware recommendations to scale to silly load
Previous Message Shridhar Daithankar 2003-08-28 14:45:40 Re: Simple queries take forever to run