2011/3/21 Adam Tistler <atistler@xxxxxxxxx>: > Pavel, thanks for the help. > > I increased work_mem from 16MB to 64MB, no difference. ÂThe queries are really just a test case. ÂMy actual queries are actual just large number of primary keys that I am selecting from the db: > > For example: >  select * from nodes where node_id in ( 1, 2, 3 ..... ) > > I found that even for small queries, the following is faster: >  select * from nodes where node_in = any (array[1,2,3 .... ]) it depends on version. I think so on last postgres, these queries are same, not sure. Regards Pavel > > > Its not really a big deal to me, I was just wondering if others could reproduce it on other systems/versions and if perhaps this is an issue that I should point out to postgres-dev. > > > Results below: > > logicops2=# explain analyze select count(*) from nodes where node_id in ( select node_id from nodes limit 100000 ); >                                QUERY PLAN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ÂAggregate Â(cost=3017.18..3017.19 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=1017.051..1017.051 rows=1 loops=1) >  -> ÂNested Loop Â(cost=2887.05..3016.68 rows=200 width=0) (actual time=157.290..986.329 rows=100000 loops=1) >     -> ÂHashAggregate Â(cost=2887.05..2889.05 rows=200 width=4) (actual time=157.252..241.995 rows=100000 loops=1) >        -> ÂLimit Â(cost=0.00..1637.05 rows=100000 width=4) (actual time=0.009..73.942 rows=100000 loops=1) >           -> ÂSeq Scan on nodes Â(cost=0.00..12355.34 rows=754734 width=4) (actual time=0.008..35.428 rows=100000 loops=1) >     -> ÂIndex Scan using n_node_id_index on nodes Â(cost=0.00..0.63 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=0.006..0.006 rows=1 loops=100000) >        Index Cond: (public.nodes.node_id = public.nodes.node_id) > ÂTotal runtime: 1017.794 ms > (8 rows) > > logicops2=# explain analyze select count(*) from nodes where node_id = any(array ( select node_id from nodes limit 100000 )); >                                QUERY PLAN > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ÂAggregate Â(cost=1718.60..1718.61 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=485.554..485.555 rows=1 loops=1) >  InitPlan 1 (returns $0) >   -> ÂLimit Â(cost=0.00..1637.05 rows=100000 width=4) (actual time=0.011..73.037 rows=100000 loops=1) >      -> ÂSeq Scan on nodes Â(cost=0.00..12355.34 rows=754734 width=4) (actual time=0.010..34.462 rows=100000 loops=1) >  -> ÂBitmap Heap Scan on nodes Â(cost=42.67..81.53 rows=10 width=0) (actual time=433.003..461.108 rows=100000 loops=1) >     Recheck Cond: (node_id = ANY ($0)) >     -> ÂBitmap Index Scan on n_node_id_index Â(cost=0.00..42.67 rows=10 width=0) (actual time=432.810..432.810 rows=100000 loops=1) >        Index Cond: (node_id = ANY ($0)) > ÂTotal runtime: 485.638 ms > (9 rows) > > On Mar 21, 2011, at 1:54 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> Hello >> >> I think so HashAggregate goes out of memory - you can try to increase >> a work_mem. >> >> There are better queries for counting duplicit then cross join >> >> Regards >> >> Pavel Stehule >> >> 2011/3/21 Adam Tistler <atistler@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> logicops2=# explain analyze select count(*) from nodes where node_id = any( ÂArray(select node_id from nodes limit 100000) ); >>>                                QUERY PLAN >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ÂAggregate Â(cost=1718.59..1718.60 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=509.126..509.127 rows=1 loops=1) >>>  InitPlan 1 (returns $0) >>>   -> ÂLimit Â(cost=0.00..1637.04 rows=100000 width=4) (actual time=0.010..76.604 rows=100000 loops=1) >>>      -> ÂSeq Scan on nodes Â(cost=0.00..12355.41 rows=754741 width=4) (actual time=0.008..38.105 rows=100000 loops=1) >>>  -> ÂBitmap Heap Scan on nodes Â(cost=42.67..81.53 rows=10 width=0) (actual time=447.274..484.283 rows=100000 loops=1) >>>     Recheck Cond: (node_id = ANY ($0)) >>>     -> ÂBitmap Index Scan on n_node_id_index Â(cost=0.00..42.67 rows=10 width=0) (actual time=447.074..447.074 rows=100000 loops=1) >>>        Index Cond: (node_id = ANY ($0)) >>> ÂTotal runtime: 509.209 ms >>> (9 rows) >>> >>> Time: 510.009 ms >>> >>> >>> logicops2=# explain analyze select count(*) from nodes where node_id in (select node_id from nodes limit 100000); >>>                                QUERY PLAN >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ÂAggregate Â(cost=3017.17..3017.18 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=1052.866..1052.866 rows=1 loops=1) >>>  -> ÂNested Loop Â(cost=2887.04..3016.67 rows=200 width=0) (actual time=167.310..1021.540 rows=100000 loops=1) >>>     -> ÂHashAggregate Â(cost=2887.04..2889.04 rows=200 width=4) (actual time=167.198..251.205 rows=100000 loops=1) >>>        -> ÂLimit Â(cost=0.00..1637.04 rows=100000 width=4) (actual time=0.008..80.090 rows=100000 loops=1) >>>           -> ÂSeq Scan on nodes Â(cost=0.00..12355.41 rows=754741 width=4) (actual time=0.007..41.566 rows=100000 loops=1) >>>     -> ÂIndex Scan using n_node_id_index on nodes Â(cost=0.00..0.63 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=0.006..0.007 rows=1 loops=100000) >>>        Index Cond: (public.nodes.node_id = public.nodes.node_id) >>> ÂTotal runtime: 1053.523 ms >>> (8 rows) >>> >>> Time: 1054.864 ms >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 20, 2011, at 2:51 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: >>> >>>> Hello >>>> >>>> 2011/3/20 Adam Tistler <atistler@xxxxxxxxx>: >>>>> I have noticed that SELECT ... = ANY(ARRAY(...)) Âis about twice as fast as SELECT IN ( ... ). >>>>> Can anyone explain a reason for this? ÂResults are the bottom and are reproducible. ÂI can test with other versions if that is necessary. >>>>> >>>> >>>> send a result of EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT ..., please >>>> >>>> The reasons can be different - less seq scans, indexes >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Pavel Stehule >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/pgsql84 --with-openssl --with-perl >>>>> CentOS release 5.4 (Final) >>>>> psql (PostgreSQL) 8.4.1 >>>>> >>>>> prompt2=# select count(*) from nodes; >>>>> Âcount >>>>> -------- >>>>> Â754734 >>>>> (1 row) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> prompt2=# \d nodes >>>>>                    ÂTable "public.nodes" >>>>>  ÂColumn  Â|      Type      |             Modifiers >>>>> --------------+--------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> Ânode_id   Â| integer         Â| not null default nextval(('node_id_seq'::text)::regclass) >>>>> Ânode_type_id | integer         Â| not null >>>>> Âtemplate_id Â| integer         Â| not null >>>>> Âtimestamp  Â| timestamp with time zone | default ('now'::text)::timestamp(6) with time zone >>>>> Indexes: >>>>>  Â"nodes_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (node_id) >>>>>  Â"n_node_id_index" btree (node_id) >>>>>  Â"n_node_type_id_index" btree (node_type_id) >>>>>  Â"n_template_id_index" btree (template_id) >>>>> >>>>> prompt2=# select count(*) from nodes where node_id = any( ÂArray(select node_id from nodes limit 100000) ); >>>>> Âcount >>>>> -------- >>>>> Â100000 >>>>> (1 row) >>>>> >>>>> Time: 404.530 ms >>>>> prompt2=# select count(*) from nodes where node_id = any( ÂArray(select node_id from nodes limit 100000) ); >>>>> Âcount >>>>> -------- >>>>> Â100000 >>>>> (1 row) >>>>> >>>>> Time: 407.316 ms >>>>> prompt2=# select count(*) from nodes where node_id = any( ÂArray(select node_id from nodes limit 100000) ); >>>>> Âcount >>>>> -------- >>>>> Â100000 >>>>> (1 row) >>>>> >>>>> Time: 408.728 ms >>>>> prompt2=# select count(*) from nodes where node_id in (select node_id from nodes limit 100000 ); >>>>> Âcount >>>>> -------- >>>>> Â100000 >>>>> (1 row) >>>>> >>>>> Time: 793.840 ms >>>>> prompt2=# select count(*) from nodes where node_id in (select node_id from nodes limit 100000 ); >>>>> Âcount >>>>> -------- >>>>> Â100000 >>>>> (1 row) >>>>> >>>>> Time: 779.137 ms >>>>> prompt2=# select count(*) from nodes where node_id in (select node_id from nodes limit 100000 ); >>>>> Âcount >>>>> -------- >>>>> Â100000 >>>>> (1 row) >>>>> >>>>> Time: 781.820 ms >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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