Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: LIKE search and performance

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc
Cc: Mark Lewis <mark(dot)lewis(at)mir3(dot)com>,James Mansion <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com>,Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>,Alexander Staubo <alex(at)purefiction(dot)net>, Andy <frum(at)ar-sd(dot)net>,pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: LIKE search and performance
Date: 2007-05-25 15:35:22
Message-ID: 4657023A.20209@archonet.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 09:13:25AM +0100, Richard Huxton wrote:
>> mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc wrote:
>>>> And since it's basically impossible to know the selectivity of this kind
>>>> of where condition, I doubt the planner would ever realistically want to
>>>> choose that plan anyway because of its poor worst-case behavior.
>>> What is a real life example where an intelligent and researched
>>> database application would issue a like or ilike query as their
>>> primary condition in a situation where they expected very high
>>> selectivity?
>>> Avoiding a poor worst-case behaviour for a worst-case behaviour that
>>> won't happen doesn't seem practical.
>> But if you are also filtering on e.g. date, and that has an index with 
>> good selectivity, you're never going to use the text index anyway are 
>> you? If you've only got a dozen rows to check against, might as well 
>> just read them in.
>> The only time it's worth considering the behaviour at all is *if* the 
>> worst-case is possible.
> 
> I notice you did not provide a real life example as requested. :-)

OK - any application that allows user-built queries: <choose column: 
foo> <choose filter: contains> <choose target: "bar">

Want another? Any application that has a "search by name" box - users 
can (and do) put one letter in and hit enter.

Unfortunately you don't always have control over the selectivity of 
queries issued.

> This seems like an ivory tower restriction. Not allowing best performance
> in a common situation vs not allowing worst performance in a not-so-common
> situation.

What best performance plan are you thinking of? I'm assuming we're 
talking about trailing-wildcard matches here, rather than "contains" 
style matches.

-- 
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Peter T. BreuerDate: 2007-05-25 15:45:41
Subject: Re: general PG network slowness (possible cure) (repost)
Previous:From: Andreas KostyrkaDate: 2007-05-25 15:20:23
Subject: Re: My quick and dirty "solution" (Re: Performance P roblem with Vacuum of bytea table (PG 8.0.13))

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group