Please compare costs and actual times in those queries: a9-dev=> explain analyze select * from records where source_id ='http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml' order by id limit 200; QUERY PLAN ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Limit (cost=0.00..489.57 rows=200 width=1126) (actual time=99701.773..99703.858 rows=200 loops=1) -> Index Scan using records_pkey on records (cost=0.00..2441698.81 rows=997489 width=1126) (actual time=99684.878..99686.936 rows=200 loops=1) Filter: ((source_id)::text = 'http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml'::text) Total runtime: 99705.916 ms (4 rows) a9-dev=> explain analyze select * from records2 where source_id ='http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml' order by id2 limit 200; QUERY PLAN ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Limit (cost=0.00..770.01 rows=200 width=1124) (actual time=0.076..0.205 rows=200 loops=1) -> Index Scan using source_id2_id2_id2x on records2 (cost=0.00..3735751.15 rows=970308 width=1124) (actual time=0.074..0.180 rows=200 loops=1) Index Cond: ((source_id)::text = 'http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml'::text) Total runtime: 0.235 ms (4 rows) First one uses records_pkey, and with estimated cost 2441698.81 runs in over 1,5 minute. Second uses index on (source_id, id) and with estimated cost 3735751.15 runs in 235 miliseconds. IMHO, problem lies not in records distribution nor normalization, but in planner's wrong cost estimation. I don't know to tell/force him to use proper index. Wiadomość napisana przez Gregg Jaskiewicz w dniu 3 paź 2011, o godz. 15:12: > You forgot to do 'reply all' mate. > If what I said about correlation is true (record spread between pages) > - then increasing stats won't help you. > > As a test, try clustering the table by the source_id column. Vacuum it > again, and retry. Unfortunately even if that helps, it won't actually > fix it permanently. > you probably need to normalize the table. > > > 2011/10/3 Nowak Michał <michal.nowak@xxxxxx>: >> Setting statistics to 1000 on id and source_id didn't solve my problem: >> >> a9-dev=> explain analyze select * from records where source_id ='http://ebuw.uw.edu.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml' order by id limit 200; >> QUERY PLAN >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Limit (cost=0.00..757.51 rows=200 width=1126) (actual time=43.648..564.798 rows=200 loops=1) >> -> Index Scan using source_id_id_idx on records (cost=0.00..1590267.66 rows=419868 width=1126) (actual time=43.631..564.700 rows=200 loops=1) >> Index Cond: ((source_id)::text = 'http://ebuw.uw.edu.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml'::text) >> Total runtime: 564.895 ms >> (4 rows) >> >> a9-dev=> explain analyze select * from records where source_id ='http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml' order by id limit 200; >> QUERY PLAN >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Limit (cost=0.00..489.57 rows=200 width=1126) (actual time=99701.773..99703.858 rows=200 loops=1) >> -> Index Scan using records_pkey on records (cost=0.00..2441698.81 rows=997489 width=1126) (actual time=99684.878..99686.936 rows=200 loops=1) >> Filter: ((source_id)::text = 'http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml'::text) >> Total runtime: 99705.916 ms >> (4 rows) >> >> >> As you can see, query looking for records with most common source_id is still by many magnitudes slower. >> >>> In other words, if the value is 27% of all values, but is evenly >>> spread across - I think planner will go for seq scan regardless. >> >> Seq scan is not used - problem is, that planner chooses records_pkey index and checks every record's source_id until it finds 200 of them. I think that if source_id_id_idx index was used, query would execute as fast as for every other value of source_id. >> I even made an experiment: I created table records2 as copy of records, and added additional column id2 with same values as id. I created same indexes on records2 as on records. Difference is, that there is no index on id2. >> Here are the results of problematic queries: >> a9-dev=> explain analyze select * from records2 where source_id ='http://ebuw.uw.edu.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml' order by id2 limit 200; >> QUERY PLAN >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Limit (cost=0.00..770.15 rows=200 width=1124) (actual time=0.071..0.220 rows=200 loops=1) >> -> Index Scan using source_id2_id2_id2x on records2 (cost=0.00..1585807.44 rows=411820 width=1124) (actual time=0.070..0.196 rows=200 loops=1) >> Index Cond: ((source_id)::text = 'http://ebuw.uw.edu.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml'::text) >> Total runtime: 0.255 ms >> (4 rows) >> >> a9-dev=> explain analyze select * from records2 where source_id ='http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml' order by id2 limit 200; >> QUERY PLAN >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Limit (cost=0.00..770.01 rows=200 width=1124) (actual time=0.076..0.205 rows=200 loops=1) >> -> Index Scan using source_id2_id2_id2x on records2 (cost=0.00..3735751.15 rows=970308 width=1124) (actual time=0.074..0.180 rows=200 loops=1) >> Index Cond: ((source_id)::text = 'http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml'::text) >> Total runtime: 0.235 ms >> (4 rows) >> >> As you can see, even for most common (~27%) values of source_id, planner chooses to use souce_id2_id2_id2x (I replaced id with id2 when creating indexes on records2 :]) index and query executes as fast as for other values. >> >> So, the question is: why planner chooses records_pkey over source_id_id_idx for the most common value of source_id? >> >> >> >> Wiadomość napisana przez Gregg Jaskiewicz w dniu 3 paź 2011, o godz. 13:20: >> >>> 2011/10/3 Nowak Michał <michal.nowak@xxxxxx>: >>>>> How many rows do you have in that table? >>>> >>>> a9-dev=> select count(*) from records; >>>> count >>>> --------- >>>> 3620311 >>>> (1 row) >>> >>> >>>> >>>> a9-dev=> select source_id, count(*) from records where source_id = 'http://ebuw.uw.edu.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml' or source_id = 'http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml' group by source_id; >>>> source_id | count >>>> --------------------------------------------------------+-------- >>>> http://ebuw.uw.edu.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml | 427254 >>>> http://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/oai-pmh-repository.xml | 989184 >>>> (2 rows) >>> >>> So the second one is roughly 27% of the table. I don't know the >>> actual condition under which planner changes over the seqscan, but >>> that value seems quite common it seems. >>> The other thing planner is going to look at is the correlation, most >>> common values, most common frequencies. >>> In other words, if the value is 27% of all values, but is evenly >>> spread across - I think planner will go for seq scan regardless. >>> >>> At the end of the day (afaik), index scan only pics pages for narrowed >>> down seqscan really. So imagine if your index scan returned all the >>> pages, you would still have to do a seqscan on all of them. Planner is >>> trying to avoid that by weighting the costs of both operations. >>> If it is too slow to run the current queries, you could try >>> normalizing the table by splitting source_id into separate one and >>> referencing it by an id. Very often what you'd find is that doing so >>> lowers I/O required, hence saves a lot of time in queries. Downside >>> is, that it is bit harder to add/update the tables. But that's where >>> triggers and procedures come handy. >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> ALTER TABLE records ALTER id SET source_id 1000; vacuum analyze verbose records; >>>> Did you mean ALTER TABLE records ALTER id SET STATISTICS 1000;? >>> >>> Yup, that's what I meant. Sorry. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> GJ >>> >>> -- >>> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) >>> To make changes to your subscription: >>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance >> >> > > > > -- > GJ -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
