Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance for large queries

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: John Meinel <john(at)johnmeinel(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers-win32 <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance for large queries
Date: 2004-09-29 08:40:11
Message-ID: 415A74EB.9040308@archonet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-performance

John Meinel wrote:
>
> So notice that when doing the actual select it is able to do the index
> query. But for some reason with a prepared statement, it is not able to
> do it.
>
> Any ideas?

In the index-using example, PG knows the value you are comparing to. So,
it can make a better estimate of how many rows will be returned. With
the prepared/compiled version it has to come up with a plan that makes
sense for any value.

If you look back at the explain output you'll see PG is guessing 181,923
rows will match with the prepared query but only 1 for the second query.
If in fact you returned that many rows, you wouldn't want to use the
index - it would mean fetching values twice.

The only work-around if you are using plpgsql functions is to use
EXECUTE to make sure your queries are planned for each value provided.

--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Meinel 2004-09-29 14:56:27 Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance for large queries
Previous Message John Meinel 2004-09-29 06:34:07 Re: Poor Performance for large queries in functions

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steven Rosenstein 2004-09-29 13:28:48 Re: This query is still running after 10 hours...
Previous Message John Meinel 2004-09-29 06:34:07 Re: Poor Performance for large queries in functions