Re: Optimizing Bitmap Heap Scan.

From: Matthew Wakeling <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>
To: niraj patel <npatel(at)gridsolv(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Optimizing Bitmap Heap Scan.
Date: 2009-12-08 14:48:33
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.00.0912081440270.25000@aragorn.flymine.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, 8 Dec 2009, niraj patel wrote:
> Thanks very much for the analysis. It does takes 17 sec to execute when
> data is not in cache.

It sounds like the table is already very much ordered by the workspaceid,
otherwise this would have taken much longer.

> What I would like to ask can partitioning around workspaceid would help?
> Or any sort of selective index would help me.

Depends on how many distinct values of workspaceid there are. I would
suggest that given how well ordered your table is, and if you aren't doing
too many writes, then there would be little benefit, and much hassle.

Matthew

--
Now, you would have thought these coefficients would be integers, given that
we're working out integer results. Using a fraction would seem really
stupid. Well, I'm quite willing to be stupid here - in fact, I'm going to
use complex numbers. -- Computer Science Lecturer

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-12-08 15:02:05 Re: performance penalty between Postgresql 8.3.8 and 8.4.1
Previous Message niraj patel 2009-12-08 14:27:35 Re: Optimizing Bitmap Heap Scan.