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

Re: significant slow down with various LIMIT

From: Chris Bowlby <excalibur(at)accesswave(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: significant slow down with various LIMIT
Date: 2010-04-13 17:59:55
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
I'm also wondering if a re-clustering of the table would work based on
the index that's used.

such that:

CLUSTER core_object USING plugins_plugin_addr_oid_id;

and see if that makes any change in the differences that your seeing.

On 04/13/2010 02:24 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> norn <andrey(dot)perliev(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I am wondering why there are so big gap between two limits and how
>> to avoid this...
> I think we've already established that it is because of the
> percentage of the table which must be scanned to get to the desired
> number of rows.  The problem is exacerbated by the fact that it's a
> "backward" scan on the index, which is slower than a forward scan --
> mainly because disks spin in one direction, and the spacing of the
> sectors is optimized for forward scans.
> There are a couple things to try which will give a more complete
> picture of what might work to make the run time more predictable. 
> Please try these, and run EXPLAIN ANALYZE of your problem query each
> way.
> (1) Try it without the ORDER BY clause and the LIMIT.
> (2) Temporarily take that top index out of consideration.  (Don't
> worry, it'll come back when you issue the ROLLBACK -- just don't
> forget the BEGIN statement.)
> DROP INDEX plugins_plugin_addr_oid_id;
> explain analyze <your query>
> (3) Try it like this (untested, so you may need to fix it up):
> explain analyze
>   from (SELECT id, city_id FROM "plugins_guide_address")
>        "plugins_guide_address"
>   JOIN "plugins_plugin_addr"
>     ON ("plugins_plugin_addr"."address_id"
>        = "plugins_guide_address"."id")
>   JOIN "core_object"
>     ON ("core_object"."id" = "plugins_plugin_addr"."oid_id")
>   WHERE "plugins_guide_address"."city_id" = 4535
>   ORDER BY "core_object"."id" DESC
>   LIMIT 4 -- or whatever it normally takes to cause the problem
> ;
> -Kevin

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Pierre CDate: 2010-04-13 18:09:27
Subject: Re: count is ten times faster
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2010-04-13 17:24:18
Subject: Re: significant slow down with various LIMIT

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