Re: Performance Killer 'IN' ?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kai Hessing <kai(dot)hessing(at)hobsons(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance Killer 'IN' ?
Date: 2006-03-31 15:45:39
Message-ID: 8566.1143819939@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Kai Hessing <kai(dot)hessing(at)hobsons(dot)de> writes:
> Index Scan using phon_phon_idx on phon (cost=0.00..5193.83 rows=530
> width=148) (actual time=0.146..0.146 rows=0 loops=1)
> ...
> Seq Scan on phon (cost=0.00..1573304.58 rows=105931 width=148) (actual
> time=369563.565..369563.565 rows=0 loops=1)

You need to look into the discrepancy between estimated and actual row
counts. (I suppose the reason you're showing 0 rows here is that you
already did these UPDATEs and so none of the rows in question pass the
status filter --- but how many rows are there matching the phon index
conditions?) Perhaps a larger statistics target for the phon column
would be a good idea.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ian Harding 2006-03-31 15:46:26 Re: PostgreSQL x Sybase
Previous Message Marko Kreen 2006-03-31 15:27:32 Re: Performance Killer 'IN' ?