Re: Postgres not willing to use an index? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Kevin Grittner
> <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
>>>>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> What's weird about this example is that when he sets enable_seqscan to
>>> off, the bitmap index scan plan is actually substantially faster, even
>>> though it in fact does scan nearly the entire heap.  I don't
>>> understand how it can be faster to scan the index and the heap than to
>>> just scan the heap.
>> It's cached in the second test, maybe?
>
> I gather that the results were repeatable, but perhaps Mario could
> double-check that?

I think that it is always cached - the machine has 4GB of RAM, and i'm
just using it for testing. Now, I think that the cache is used because
there is no I/O wait when I run the queries (if you have any suggestion
on how to check cache usage, since I have no idea):

jura=# set enable_seqscan to true;
SET
jura=# explain analyze select * from transactions where
transaction_time_commit between '2008-01-01' and '2008-01-31 23:59:59';

             QUERY PLAN


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Seq Scan on transactions  (cost=0.00..418365.68 rows=759775 width=91)
(actual time=928.342..3788.232 rows=722176 loops=1)
    Filter: ((transaction_time_commit >= '2008-01-01
00:00:00+01'::timestamp with time zone) AND (transaction_time_commit <=
'2008-01-31 23:59:59+01'::timestamp with time zone))
  Total runtime: 3936.744 ms
(3 rows)

jura=# set enable_seqscan to false;
SET
jura=# explain analyze select * from transactions where
transaction_time_commit between '2008-01-01' and '2008-01-31 23:59:59';

                  QUERY PLAN


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Bitmap Heap Scan on transactions  (cost=428882.89..651630.52
rows=759775 width=91) (actual time=1358.040..1633.867 rows=722176 loops=1)
    Recheck Cond: ((transaction_time_commit >= '2008-01-01
00:00:00+01'::timestamp with time zone) AND (transaction_time_commit <=
'2008-01-31 23:59:59+01'::timestamp with time zone))
    ->  Bitmap Index Scan on transactions_idx__client_data
(cost=0.00..428692.95 rows=759775 width=0) (actual
time=1354.485..1354.485 rows=722176 loops=1)
          Index Cond: ((transaction_time_commit >= '2008-01-01
00:00:00+01'::timestamp with time zone) AND (transaction_time_commit <=
'2008-01-31 23:59:59+01'::timestamp with time zone))
  Total runtime: 1778.938 ms
(5 rows)


Now, transactions_idx__client_data index has transaction_time_commit as
the last column in index.

When I 'recreate' the database, and run the queries again, first run
which uses sequential scan is around 10 seconds, heavy I/O, any
subsequent query run takes cca 3900 msecs, as shown above.

When I say 'disable seqscan', planner uses Bitmap Index Scan, as shown
above, just that the first query takes around 25 seconds to run, with
heavy I/O. Any subsequent query runs take somewhat less than 2 seconds,
as shown above.

I'm not sure on what to do to minimize the impact of the OS-cache, apart
from taking RAM modules out of the machine - if you have any suggestions
I'll try to apply them.

On production database I changed the index so that
'transaction_time_commit' is the first column, and now I don't get any
sequential scans on transactions table when only WHERE condition is on
transaction_time_commit.

    Mike