Re: Performance With Joins on Large Tables

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 9/13/06, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Joshua Marsh" <icub3d@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> Are the tables perhaps nearly in order by the dsiacctno fields?

> My assumption would be they are in exact order.  The text file I used
> in the COPY statement had them in order, so if COPY preserves that in
> the database, then it is in order.

Ah.  So the question is why the planner isn't noticing that.  What do
you see in the pg_stats view for the two dsiacctno fields --- the
correlation field in particular?


Here are the results:
data=# select tablename, attname, n_distinct, avg_width, correlation
from pg_stats where tablename in ('view_505', 'r3s169') and attname =
'dsiacctno';
tablename |  attname  | n_distinct | avg_width | correlation
-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+-------------
view_505  | dsiacctno |         -1 |        13 |    -0.13912
r3s169    | dsiacctno |      44156 |        13 |   -0.126824
(2 rows)


Someone suggested CLUSTER to make sure they are in fact ordered, I can
try that to and let everyone know the results.

> The system has 8GB of ram and work_mem is set to 256MB.

Seems reasonable enough.  BTW, I don't think you've mentioned exactly
which PG version you're using?

                       regards, tom lane


I am using 8.0.3.


[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux