Re: text search: tablescan cost for a tsvector

From: "Marc Mamin" <M(dot)Mamin(at)intershop(dot)de>
To: "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Subject: Re: text search: tablescan cost for a tsvector
Date: 2012-02-29 20:40:22
Message-ID: C4DAC901169B624F933534A26ED7DF3103E91862@JENMAIL01.ad.intershop.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

> Von: Robert Haas [mailto:robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com]
> Gesendet: Mi 2/29/2012 7:32

>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 6:05 AM, Marc Mamin <M(dot)Mamin(at)intershop(dot)de> wrote:
> > without analyze: http://explain.depesz.com/s/6At
> > with analyze: http://explain.depesz.com/s/r3B
...
> The problem seems to be that the cost estimator doesn't know that
> detoasting is expensive.

Hello,

Tom Lane has started a follow up thread in the hacker list.
Detoasting is indeed the main obstacle, but I've repeated my test using plain storage
and the planer still choose (systematically?) the slowest query.
It seems that I bumped into 2 different issues at the same time.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-02/msg00896.php

Backround:
Our reporting system offers amongst others time histograms
combined with a FTS filtering on error occurences (imported from error logs),
It is hence not unusual that given search terms are found within a majority of the documents...

best regards,

Marc Mamin

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marcin Mirosław 2012-03-01 11:45:28 [planner] Ignore "order by" in subselect if parrent do count(*)
Previous Message Igor Schtein 2012-02-29 20:37:56 Performance of SQL Function versus View