Hi Greg.
At 2008-07-03 11:05:46 +0100, stark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> And increase the statistics target on header_fields and re-analyze?
Aha! Thanks for the tip. I just changed the default_statistics_target to
100 (from 10) and ANALYSEd header_fields and mailbox_messages, and now
it ALWAYS uses the index scan if I specify a LIMIT. That is,
select count(*) from header_fields where message in
(select message from mailbox_messages limit N)
always uses the index scan on header_fields_message_key, even when N is
equal to the number of rows in mailbox_messages (109410).
Aggregate (cost=30779.98..30779.99 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=175040.923..175040.926 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Nested Loop (cost=3279.73..30760.93 rows=7617 width=0) (actual time=2114.426..169137.088 rows=1771029 loops=1)
-> HashAggregate (cost=3279.73..3281.73 rows=200 width=4) (actual time=2076.662..2649.541 rows=109365 loops=1)
-> Limit (cost=0.00..1912.10 rows=109410 width=4) (actual time=0.029..1386.128 rows=109410 loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on mailbox_messages (cost=0.00..1912.10 rows=109410 width=4) (actual time=0.022..744.190 rows=109410 loops=1)
-> Index Scan using header_fields_message_key on header_fields (cost=0.00..136.92 rows=38 width=4) (actual time=0.678..1.416 rows=16 loops=109365)
Index Cond: (header_fields.message = "outer".message)
Total runtime: 175041.496 ms
Note the massive _under_estimation in the hash aggregate and the
nestloop. If I don't specify a limit, it'll use a seq scan again.
Very interesting.
-- ams
