Re: TPC-R benchmarks

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Oleg Lebedev <oleg(dot)lebedev(at)waterford(dot)org>
Cc: Jenny Zhang <jenny(at)osdl(dot)org>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: TPC-R benchmarks
Date: 2003-09-26 04:28:54
Message-ID: 8486.1064550534@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Oleg Lebedev <oleg(dot)lebedev(at)waterford(dot)org> writes:
> Seems like in your case postgres uses an i_l_partkey index on lineitem
> table. I have a foreign key constraint defined between the lineitem and
> part table, but didn't create an special indexes. Here is my query plan:

The planner is obviously unhappy with this plan (note the large cost
numbers), but it can't find a way to do better. An index on
lineitem.l_partkey would help, I think.

The whole query seems like it's written in a very inefficient fashion;
couldn't the estimation of '0.2 * avg(l_quantity)' be amortized across
multiple join rows? But I dunno whether the TPC rules allow for
significant manual rewriting of the given query.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shridhar Daithankar 2003-09-26 07:25:15 Re: Indices arent being used
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2003-09-26 03:41:15 Re: TPC-R benchmarks