Re: FTS performance issue probably due to wrong planner estimate of detoasting

From: Jesper Krogh <jesper(at)krogh(dot)cc>
To: Stefan Keller <sfkeller(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: FTS performance issue probably due to wrong planner estimate of detoasting
Date: 2013-02-08 06:56:03
Message-ID: 5114A183.3090502@krogh.cc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 08/02/13 01:52, Stefan Keller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have problems with the performance of FTS in a query like this:
>
> SELECT * FROM FullTextSearch WHERE content_tsv_gin @@
> plainto_tsquery('english', 'good');
>
> It's slow (> 30 sec.) for some GB (27886 html files, originally 73 MB zipped).
> The planner obviously always chooses table scan: http://explain.depesz.com/s/EEE
> I have to check again, if I'm doing something wrong but I'm pretty
> sure it has to do with de-toasting and (wrong?) cost estimations.
If you havent done it .. bump up statistics target on the column and
re-analyze, see what that gives.

I have also been playing with the cost-numbers in order to get it to favour
an index-scan more often. That is lowering random_page_cost to be close to
seq_page_cost, dependent on your system, the amount of memory, etc, then
this can have negative side-effects on non-gin-queries.

--
Jesper

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karolis Pocius 2013-02-08 12:36:43 Slow query even with aggressive auto analyze
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2013-02-08 05:45:57 Re: FTS performance issue probably due to wrong planner estimate of detoasting