| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Cc: | Aaron Brashears <abrashears(at)justin(dot)tv> | 
| Subject: | Bad cost estimate with FALSE filter condition | 
| Date: | 2015-02-28 01:28:06 | 
| Message-ID: | 54F119A6.9080106@agliodbs.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance | 
All:
This got posted to pgsql-bugs, but got no attention there[1], so I'm
sending it to this list.
Test case:
createdb bench
pgbench -i -s bench
\c bench
bench=# explain select * from pgbench_accounts where aid = 2;
                                          QUERY PLAN
---------------------------------------------------------------
 Index Scan using pgbench_accounts_pkey on pgbench_accounts
(cost=0.42..8.44 rows=1 width=97)
   Index Cond: (aid = 2)
(2 rows)
bench=# explain select * from pgbench_accounts where aid = 2 and false;
                                QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------
 Result  (cost=0.00..26394.00 rows=1 width=97)
   One-Time Filter: false
   ->  Seq Scan on pgbench_accounts  (cost=0.00..26394.00 rows=1 width=97)
(3 rows)
This seems like a special case of the "aborted plan cost", that is, when
the planner expects to abort a plan early, it nevertheless returns the
full cost for the non-aborted version of the query, rather than the
working cost, which is based on the abort.
For example:
bench=# create index on pgbench_accounts(bid);
CREATE INDEX
bench=# explain select * from pgbench_accounts where bid = 2;
                                                QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Index Scan using pgbench_accounts_bid_idx on pgbench_accounts
(cost=0.42..4612.10 rows=102667 width=97)
   Index Cond: (bid = 2)
(2 rows)
bench=# explain select * from pgbench_accounts where bid = 2 limit 1;
                                   QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Limit  (cost=0.00..0.28 rows=1 width=97)
   ->  Seq Scan on pgbench_accounts  (cost=0.00..28894.00 rows=102667
width=97)
         Filter: (bid = 2)
(3 rows)
So in this case, the top-level node returns a lower cost because the
planner knows that it will find a row with bid=2 fairly quickly in the
seq scan.  But in the WHERE FALSE example, that scan *is* the top-level
node, so the planner returns a fictitious cost for the whole query.
Or is there something else at work here?
[1]
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150225194953.2546.86836@wrigleys.postgresql.org
-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Paolo Losi | 2015-02-28 09:08:30 | pushing order by + limit to union subqueries | 
| Previous Message | Sergey Shchukin | 2015-02-27 11:42:39 | Re: Re: [pgadmin-support] Issue with a hanging apply process on the replica db after vacuum works on primary |