Re: Join Query Perfomance Issue

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Zaksek <zaksek(at)ptt(dot)uni-due(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Join Query Perfomance Issue
Date: 2008-02-13 15:48:42
Message-ID: 15212.1202917722@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Thomas Zaksek <zaksek(at)ptt(dot)uni-due(dot)de> writes:
> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.00..32604.48 rows=3204 width=14) (actual
> time=11.991..2223.227 rows=2950 loops=1)
> -> Index Scan using
> messungen_v_dat_2007_11_12_messpunkt_minute_tag_idx on
> messungen_v_dat_2007_11_12 m (cost=0.00..5371.09 rows=3204 width=4)
> (actual time=0.152..12.385 rows=2950 loops=1)
> Index Cond: ((ganglinientyp = 'M'::bpchar) AND (992 = minute_tag))
> -> Index Scan using messwerte_mv_nr_idx on messwerte_mv w
> (cost=0.00..8.49 rows=1 width=18) (actual time=0.730..0.734 rows=1
> loops=2950)
> Index Cond: (w.nr = m.messpunkt)
> Total runtime: 2234.143 ms
> (6 rows)

> To me this plan looks very clean and nearly optimal,

For so many rows I'm surprised it's not using a bitmap indexscan.
What PG version is this? How big are these tables?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2008-02-13 15:56:22 Re: Dell Perc/6
Previous Message Albert Cervera Areny 2008-02-13 15:23:56 Re: Creating and updating table using function parameter reference