Hello maybe is wrong tip, but your function like de* should be slow. What is time of query without calling these functions? Pavel Stehule 2009/7/27 Thomas Zaksek <zaksek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Hi, > subject is the following type of query needed in a function to select data: > > SELECT ' 13.04.2009 12:00:00 ' AS zeit, > > > 'M' AS ganglinientyp, > > > m.zs_nr AS zs, > > > j_ges, > > > de_mw_abh_j_lkw(mw_abh) AS j_lkw, > > > de_mw_abh_v_pkw(mw_abh) AS v_pkw, > > > de_mw_abh_v_lkw(mw_abh) AS v_lkw, > > > de_mw_abh_p_bel(mw_abh) AS p_bel > > > FROM messungen_v_dat_2009_04_13 m > > > INNER JOIN de_mw w ON w.nr = m.mw_nr > > > WHERE m.ganglinientyp = 'M' > > AND > ' 890 ' = m.minute_tag; > explain analyse brings up > Nested Loop (cost=0.00..66344.47 rows=4750 width=10) (actual > time=134.160..19574.228 rows=4148 loops=1) > -> Index Scan using messungen_v_dat_2009_04_13_gtyp_minute_tag_idx on > messungen_v_dat_2009_04_13 m (cost=0.00..10749.14 rows=4750 width=8) > (actual time=64.681..284.732 rows=4148 loops=1) > Index Cond: ((ganglinientyp = 'M'::bpchar) AND (891::smallint = > minute_tag)) > -> Index Scan using de_nw_nr_idx on de_mw w (cost=0.00..10.69 rows=1 > width=10) (actual time=4.545..4.549 rows=1 loops=4148) > Index Cond: (w.nr = m.mw_nr) > Total runtime: 19590.078 ms > > Seems quite slow to me. > Is this query plan near to optimal or are their any serious flaws? > > -- > Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance > -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
