Re: Surprise :-( - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Mihai Gheorghiu |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Surprise :-( |
Date | |
Msg-id | 00d401c255e1$6842b540$6e646464@New6.Travel Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Surprise :-( ("Mihai Gheorghiu" <tanethq@earthlink.net>) |
Responses |
Re: Surprise :-(
|
List | pgsql-general |
Only one of the 350k trxtype=MP records has isposted=false !!! I am downloading 7.2.2 right now, and, God willing, on Monday I will be able to apply your recommendations regarding explain analyze. Which leads me to the following question: I dump this database with pgdump in less than 15 minutes and restore it with psql -d mydata -f mydata.dmp in 375 minutes. Is there a faster way? Thanks again. -----Original Message----- From: Nigel J. Andrews <nandrews@investsystems.co.uk> To: Mihai Gheorghiu <tanethq@earthlink.net> Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org <pgsql-general@postgresql.org> Date: Friday, September 06, 2002 2:27 PM Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Surprise :-( >On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Mihai Gheorghiu wrote: > >> PG7.1.3 on RH7.1 on Dell PowerEdge 2500SC P3-933, 1GB RAM, 18GB SCSI160 >> There are 350k rows with trxtype=MP >> With indexscan=off: >> Aggregate (cost=22975.15..22990.27 rows=302 width=24) >> -> Group (cost=22975.15..22982.71 rows=3025 width=24) >> -> Sort (cost=22975.15..22975.15 rows=3025 width=24) >> -> Seq Scan on tbas_transactions (cost=0.00..22800.29 >> rows=3025 width=24) >> Time: 25.9s >> With indexscan=on: >> Aggregate (cost=10874.64..10889.76 rows=302 width=24) >> -> Group (cost=10874.64..10882.20 rows=3025 width=24) >> -> Sort (cost=10874.64..10874.64 rows=3025 width=24) >> -> Index Scan using trx_trxtype_idx on tbas_transactions >> (cost=0.00..10699.78 rows=3025 width=24) >> Time: 24.9s >> The point is I need to run this query in a fraction of the above time, >> otherwise I'm in deep trouble. >> Any suggestion is welcome. >> > >Yes, drop the index on trxtype so that it's selecting on isposted. Obviously, >knowing things like the actual number of rows returned by explain analyze (only >7.2.x?) as per my other message would be more usedul. > >Your trxtype index is actually selecting 50% of the rows but thinks it only has >3025...hmmmm...typing that made me think something is wrong...ah, I see 7.1 .3, >not 7.2.x...how many other values for this field are there? Even 7.1.3 should >have caught that as a common value right? However, in short, unless isposted is >true for lots of those 350k rows you dropping the index would hopefully prompt >a switch to an index on that column. Or, create a multicolumn index on >(isposted,trxtype). > >BTW, there must be some sort of data clustering going because that index scan >is faster than the sequential scan even though it's fetching 50% of the >table. Perhaps it's a result of caching. > > >-- >Nigel J. Andrews >Director > >--- >Logictree Systems Limited >Computer Consultants >
pgsql-general by date: