Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Nested Loop join being improperly chosen

From: "David Rowley" <dgrowley(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "'Brad Ediger'" <brad(at)bradediger(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Nested Loop join being improperly chosen
Date: 2008-08-28 23:01:05
Message-ID: 2F2B8795E8584EEB97AF9FE82CA1D7A5@amd64 (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
I had a similar problem here:

Is the nested loop performing a LEFT join with yours? It's a little
difficult to tell just from the query plan you showed.

A work around for mine was to use a full outer join and eliminate the extra
rows in the where clause. A bit of a hack but it changed a 2 min query into
one that ran in under a second.

Of course this is not helping with your problem but at least may trigger
some more feedback.


-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Brad Ediger
Sent: 22 August 2008 16:26
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: [PERFORM] Nested Loop join being improperly chosen

I'm having trouble with a Nested Loop being selected for a rather  
complex query; it turns out this is a pretty bad plan as the nested  
loop's row estimates are quite off (1 estimated / 1207881 actual). If  
I disable enable_nestloop, the query executes much faster (42 seconds  
instead of 605). The tables in the query have all been ANALYZEd just  
before generating these plans.

Here are the plans with and without enable_nestloop:

The inventory table is huge; it currently has about 1.3 x 10^9 tuples.  
The items table has around 10,000 tuples, and the other tables in the  
query are tiny.

Any ideas or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Brad Ediger

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Scott CareyDate: 2008-08-28 23:01:58
Subject: Re: indexing for distinct search in timestamp based table
Previous:From: David RowleyDate: 2008-08-28 22:48:43
Subject: Re: indexing for distinct search in timestamp based table

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group