Trouble with LEFT JOIN using VIEWS.

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

 



Hello,

I've just hit problem, that is unusual for me.

quaker=> \d sites
                                Table "public.sites"
Column | Type | Modifiers
-----------+-------------------+----------------------------------------------------
id | integer | not null default nextval('sites_id_seq'::regclass)
 site_name | character varying | not null
 user_id   | integer           | not null
 extra     | integer           |
Indexes:
    "sites_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (id)
    "sites_site_name_key_unique" UNIQUE, btree (site_name text_pattern_ops)
    "sites_user_id_key" btree (user_id)

quaker=> \d users
                                Table "public.users"
Column | Type | Modifiers
-----------+-------------------+----------------------------------------------------
id | integer | not null default nextval('users_id_seq'::regclass)
 user_name | character varying | not null
 extra     | integer           |
Indexes:
    "users_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (id)

Both tables filled with 100k records of random data. In users id is in range from 1..100k, same in sites. In sites user_id is random, range from 1..150k.

I've created views:

quaker=> \d users_secure
        View "public.users_secure"
  Column   |       Type        | Modifiers
-----------+-------------------+-----------
 id        | integer           |
 user_name | character varying |
View definition:
 SELECT users.id, users.user_name
   FROM users;

quaker=> \d users_secure_with_has_extra
 View "public.users_secure_with_has_extra"
  Column   |       Type        | Modifiers
-----------+-------------------+-----------
 id        | integer           |
 user_name | character varying |
 has_extra | boolean           |
View definition:
 SELECT users.id, users.user_name, users.extra IS NOT NULL AS has_extra
   FROM users;

Now, when I do simple query to find all data for sites matching site_name like 'H3bh%' (there are at least one record in sites matching this condition).

quaker=> explain analyze select s.site_name,u.user_name from sites_secure s left join users_secure_with_has_extra u on u.id = s.user_id where site_name like 'H3bh%' order by site_name limit 10;

QUERY PLAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit (cost=3897.02..3897.03 rows=2 width=44) (actual time=430.326..430.331 rows=1 loops=1) -> Sort (cost=3897.02..3897.03 rows=2 width=44) (actual time=430.321..430.323 rows=1 loops=1)
         Sort Key: sites.site_name
-> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.00..3897.01 rows=2 width=44) (actual time=290.103..430.301 rows=1 loops=1)
               Join Filter: ("inner".id = "outer".user_id)
-> Index Scan using sites_site_name_key_unique on sites (cost=0.00..6.01 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.044..0.054 rows=1 loops=1) Index Cond: (((site_name)::text ~>=~ 'H3bh'::text) AND ((site_name)::text ~<~ 'H3bi'::text))
                     Filter: ((site_name)::text ~~ 'H3bh%'::text)
-> Seq Scan on users (cost=0.00..1641.00 rows=100000 width=20) (actual time=0.007..245.406 rows=100000 loops=1)
 Total runtime: 430.432 ms
(10 rows)

When I resign from LEFT JOIN users_secure_with_has_extra, and put JOIN instead I've got:

quaker=> explain analyze select s.site_name,u.user_name from sites_secure s join users_secure_with_has_extra u on u.id = s.user_id where site_name like 'H3bh%' order by site_name limit 10;

QUERY PLAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit (cost=9.05..9.06 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.112..0.118 rows=1 loops=1) -> Sort (cost=9.05..9.06 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.106..0.108 rows=1 loops=1)
         Sort Key: sites.site_name
-> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..9.04 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.073..0.088 rows=1 loops=1) -> Index Scan using sites_site_name_key_unique on sites (cost=0.00..6.01 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.044..0.050 rows=1 loops=1) Index Cond: (((site_name)::text ~>=~ 'H3bh'::text) AND ((site_name)::text ~<~ 'H3bi'::text))
                     Filter: ((site_name)::text ~~ 'H3bh%'::text)
-> Index Scan using users_pkey on users (cost=0.00..3.02 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.019..0.023 rows=1 loops=1)
                     Index Cond: (users.id = "outer".user_id)
 Total runtime: 0.216 ms
(10 rows)

As explain shows PostgreSQL is using index scan on users, instead of seq scan like in example above.

Now. When I use view with no has_extra field (important: field is a simple function on extra field) I get expectable results. Both using indexes.

quaker=> explain analyze select s.site_name,u.user_name from sites_secure s left join users_secure u on u.id = s.user_id where site_name like 'H3bh%' order by site_name limit 10;

QUERY PLAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit (cost=9.05..9.06 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.111..0.117 rows=1 loops=1) -> Sort (cost=9.05..9.06 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.105..0.107 rows=1 loops=1)
         Sort Key: sites.site_name
-> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.00..9.04 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.072..0.087 rows=1 loops=1) -> Index Scan using sites_site_name_key_unique on sites (cost=0.00..6.01 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.043..0.049 rows=1 loops=1) Index Cond: (((site_name)::text ~>=~ 'H3bh'::text) AND ((site_name)::text ~<~ 'H3bi'::text))
                     Filter: ((site_name)::text ~~ 'H3bh%'::text)
-> Index Scan using users_pkey on users (cost=0.00..3.02 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.019..0.022 rows=1 loops=1)
                     Index Cond: (users.id = "outer".user_id)
 Total runtime: 0.216 ms
(10 rows)

quaker=> explain analyze select s.site_name,u.user_name from sites_secure s join users_secure u on u.id = s.user_id where site_name like 'H3bh%' order by site_name limit 10;

QUERY PLAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit (cost=9.05..9.06 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.109..0.115 rows=1 loops=1) -> Sort (cost=9.05..9.06 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.104..0.106 rows=1 loops=1)
         Sort Key: sites.site_name
-> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..9.04 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.071..0.086 rows=1 loops=1) -> Index Scan using sites_site_name_key_unique on sites (cost=0.00..6.01 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.042..0.048 rows=1 loops=1) Index Cond: (((site_name)::text ~>=~ 'H3bh'::text) AND ((site_name)::text ~<~ 'H3bi'::text))
                     Filter: ((site_name)::text ~~ 'H3bh%'::text)
-> Index Scan using users_pkey on users (cost=0.00..3.02 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.018..0.021 rows=1 loops=1)
                     Index Cond: (users.id = "outer".user_id)
 Total runtime: 0.214 ms
(10 rows)

Why?

quaker=> select version();
version
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PostgreSQL 8.1.10 on i486-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC cc (GCC) 4.1.3 20070831 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.2-16ubuntu1)
(1 row)



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

              http://archives.postgresql.org

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

  Powered by Linux