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

Re: Endless loop in ExecNestLoop

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Philipp Reisner <philipp(dot)reisner(at)linbit(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Endless loop in ExecNestLoop
Date: 2006-01-31 15:39:58
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Philipp Reisner <philipp(dot)reisner(at)linbit(dot)com> writes:
> Well after more research it turned out that sometimes we have a plan 
> that executes in less than 2 seconds, and somethimes we get a plan 
> does not terminate within 1h30 of CPU time.

Could you send EXPLAIN ANALYZE output for this (at least for the fast
case)?  Presumably some of the planner's estimates are way off, but
there's no way to know which ones from just EXPLAIN.

>> What reasons are there for the planer to choose a different plan ?

It looks to me like the statistics have changed, because it's showing
different rowcount and width estimates for the same scan:

>                                        ->  Index Scan using contractelements_pkey on contractelements cel  (cost=0.00..5574.21 rows=459 width=22)
>                                              Filter: (upper((isactiv)::text) = 'Y'::text)

>                                        ->  Seq Scan on contractelements cel  (cost=0.00..4253.10 rows=387 width=21)
>                                              Filter: (upper((isactiv)::text) = 'Y'::text)

Perhaps you ran VACUUM or ANALYZE in between, or autovacuum did so for

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Patrick RotsaertDate: 2006-01-31 15:47:12
Subject: Re: BUG #2225: Backend crash -- BIG table
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-01-31 15:18:06
Subject: Re: BUG #2225: Backend crash -- BIG table

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