Re: Why hash join instead of nested loop?

From: Rhett Garber <rhettg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Havasvölgyi Ottó <h(dot)otto(at)freemail(dot)hu>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why hash join instead of nested loop?
Date: 2005-08-08 17:00:08
Message-ID: 41b0fe89050808100021a2a4fc@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

This is postgres 7.4.1

All the rows involved are integers.

Thanks,

Rhett

On 8/5/05, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Rhett Garber <rhettg(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Hash Join (cost=5.96..7.04 rows=1 width=14) (actual
> > time=10.591..10.609 rows=1 loops=1)
> > Hash Cond: ("outer".id = "inner".obj2)
> > -> Seq Scan on rtmessagestate (cost=0.00..1.05 rows=5 width=14)
> > (actual time=0.011..0.022 rows=5 loops=1)
> > -> Hash (cost=5.96..5.96 rows=1 width=4) (actual
> > time=0.109..0.109 rows=0 loops=1)
> > -> Index Scan using connection_regid_obj1_index on
> > connection (cost=0.00..5.96 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=0.070..0.076
> > rows=1 loops=1)
> > Index Cond: ((connection_registry_id = 40105) AND (obj1
> > = 73582)) Total runtime: 11.536 ms
> > (7 rows)
>
> [ scratches head... ] If the hash table build takes only 0.109 msec
> and loads only one row into the hash table, and the scan of
> rtmessagestate takes only 0.022 msec and produces only 5 rows, it is
> real hard to see how the join takes 10.609 msec overall. Unless the id
> and obj2 columns are of a datatype with an incredibly slow equality
> function. What is the datatype involved here, anyway? And what PG
> version are we speaking of?
>
> regards, tom lane
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kari Lavikka 2005-08-08 17:54:38 Re: Finding bottleneck
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-08-08 16:56:40 Re: Finding bottleneck