Re: Bad plan for nested loop + limit

From: David Wilson <david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alexander Staubo <alex(at)bengler(dot)no>
Cc: pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bad plan for nested loop + limit
Date: 2009-02-15 04:29:52
Message-ID: e7f9235d0902142029h5b53baf2gede92b22afbbad35@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Alexander Staubo <alex(at)bengler(dot)no> wrote:
>
> Output from "explain analyze":
>
> Limit (cost=0.00..973.63 rows=4 width=48) (actual
> time=61.554..4039.704 rows=1 loops=1)
> -> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..70101.65 rows=288 width=48) (actual
> time=61.552..4039.700 rows=1 loops=1)
> -> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..68247.77 rows=297 width=52)
> (actual time=61.535..4039.682 rows=1 loops=1)

Those estimates are pretty far off. Did you try increasing the
statistics target? Also, is the first query repeatable (that is, is it
already in cache when you do the test, or alternately, are all queries
*out* of cache when you test?)
--
- David T. Wilson
david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Staubo 2009-02-15 16:45:42 Re: Bad plan for nested loop + limit
Previous Message Alexander Staubo 2009-02-14 22:25:05 Bad plan for nested loop + limit