Re: creating of temporary table takes very long

You might try rewriting the coalesces into a row comparison...

WHERE row($4, $5, ...) IS NOT DISTINCT FROM row(interface_id, source_id, ...)

See
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/functions-comparisons.html#AEN13408

Note that the docs only show IS DISTINCT FROM, so you might have to do

WHERE NOT row(...) IS DISTINCT FROM row(...)

On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 09:13:04AM -0700, Sriram Dandapani wrote:
> Thx Tom
>
> I guess I have to abandon the bulk update. The columns in the where
> clause comprise 80% of the table columns..So indexing all may not help.
> The target table will have on average 60-180 million rows.
>
> I will attempt the in instead of exist and let you know the result
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 9:10 AM
> To: Sriram Dandapani
> Cc: Pgsql-Performance (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] creating of temporary table takes very long
>
> "Sriram Dandapani" <sdandapani(at)counterpane(dot)com> writes:
> > Got an explain analyze output..Here it is
> > "Seq Scan on c_chkpfw_hr_tr a (cost=0.00..225975659.89 rows=11000
> > width=136) (actual time=2.345..648070.474 rows=22001 loops=1)"
> > " Filter: (subplan)"
> > " SubPlan"
> > " -> Bitmap Heap Scan on chkpfw_tr_hr_dimension b
> > (cost=1474.64..10271.13 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=29.439..29.439
> > rows=1 loops=22001)"
> > " Recheck Cond: (($0 = firstoccurrence) AND ($1 =
> sentryid_id)
> > AND ($2 = node_id))"
> > " Filter: (($3 = customerid_id) AND (COALESCE($4, 0) =
> > COALESCE(interface_id, 0)) AND (COALESCE($5, 0) = COALESCE(source_id,
> > 0)) AND (COALESCE($6, 0) = COALESCE(destination_id, 0)) AND
> > (COALESCE($7, 0) = COALESCE(sourceport_id, 0)) AND (COALESCE($8 (..)"
> > " -> Bitmap Index Scan on chkpfw_tr_hr_idx1
> > (cost=0.00..1474.64 rows=38663 width=0) (actual time=12.144..12.144
> > rows=33026 loops=22001)"
> > " Index Cond: (($0 = firstoccurrence) AND ($1 =
> > sentryid_id) AND ($2 = node_id))"
> > "Total runtime: 648097.800 ms"
>
> That's probably about as good a query plan as you can hope for given
> the way the query is written. Those COALESCE comparisons are all
> unindexable (unless you make functional indexes on the COALESCE
> expressions). You might get somewhere by converting the EXISTS
> to an IN, though.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461