I'm working on Postgresql 9.5.3 and executed a query which takes 5 or 7 seconds and it should not take more than 0.30 milliseconds, the query is:
-----------QUERY--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
with recursive t(level,parent_id,id) as (
select 0,parent_id,id from parties where parent_id = 105
union
select t.level + 1,c.parent_id,c.id from parties c join t on c.parent_id = t.id
)
select distinct id from t order by id;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The parties table has 245512 rows and one index named "index_parties_on_parent_id"
, so I added an EXPLAIN ANALYZE VERBOSE to get more details and it was the result:
--------RESULT--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Sort (cost=21237260.78..21237261.28 rows=200 width=4) (actual time=6850.338..6850.343 rows=88 loops=1) |
| Output: t.id |
| Sort Key: t.id |
| Sort Method: quicksort Memory: 29kB |
| CTE t |
| -> Recursive Union (cost=0.43..20562814.38 rows=29974967 width=12) (actual time=0.072..6850.180 rows=88 loops=1) |
| -> Index Scan using index_parties_on_parent_id on public.parties (cost=0.43..3091.24 rows=807 width=8) (actual time=0.064..0.154 rows=23 loops=1) |
| Output: 0, parties.parent_id, parties.id |
| Index Cond: (parties.parent_id = 105) |
| -> Hash Join (cost=777279.14..1996022.38 rows=2997416 width=12) (actual time=2245.623..2283.290 rows=22 loops=3) |
| Output: (t_1.level + 1), c.parent_id, c.id |
| Hash Cond: (t_1.id = c.parent_id) |
| -> WorkTable Scan on t t_1 (cost=0.00..161.40 rows=8070 width=8) (actual time=0.002..0.009 rows=29 loops=3) |
| Output: t_1.level, t_1.id |
| -> Hash (cost=606642.73..606642.73 rows=10400673 width=8) (actual time=2206.149..2206.149 rows=1742 loops=3) |
| Output: c.parent_id, c.id |
| Buckets: 2097152 Batches: 16 Memory Usage: 16388kB |
| -> Seq Scan on public.parties c (cost=0.00..606642.73 rows=10400673 width=8) (actual time=71.070..2190.318 rows=244249 loops=3) |
| Output: c.parent_id, c.id |
| -> HashAggregate (cost=674436.76..674438.76 rows=200 width=4) (actual time=6850.291..6850.305 rows=88 loops=1) |
| Output: t.id |
| Group Key: t.id |
| -> CTE Scan on t (cost=0.00..599499.34 rows=29974967 width=4) (actual time=0.075..6850.236 rows=88 loops=1) |
| Output: t.id |
| Planning time: 0.815 ms |
Execution time: 7026.026 ms
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, I could see that
index_parties_on_parent_id showed 10400673 rows and checking index_parties_on_parent_id
index I get this information: num_rows =
10400673 and index_size = 310 MB
Could Anybody explain me why the difference between
parties table = 245512 and index_parties_on_parent_id
index = 10400673? and How could I improve this index and its response
time? |
