[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re:



Jeff Cole <cole.jeff@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Hi Tom, thanks for the response.  Here are the pg_stats.  I think I  
> understand what the stats say, but I don't know what to conclude from  
> them.

OK, the symptom_id row claims there are only 80 distinct values of
symptom_id in symptom_reports.  This is a bit low (looks like the true
state of affairs is that all but 2 of the 108 entries of symptoms are
represented in symptom_reports), but it's not horridly off considering
that you're using the rather low default statistics_target.  What
happens is that the planner expects that on average only 80 rows of the
inner join will need to be scanned to find a match for a given symptoms.id,
and this makes the nestloop look cheap.  However, per your previous
EXPLAIN ANALYZE:

>     ->  Nested Loop IN Join  (cost=149.05..586.26 rows=85 width=0)  (actual time=54.517..3441.115 rows=106 loops=1)
>           Join Filter: ("outer".id = "inner".symptom_id)
>           ->  Seq Scan on symptoms  (cost=0.00..3.08 rows=108  width=4) (actual time=0.007..0.273 rows=108 loops=1)
>           ->  Hash IN Join  (cost=149.05..603.90 rows=13074 width=4)  (actual time=0.078..24.503 rows=3773 loops=108)


the *actual* average number of rows scanned is 3773.  I'm not sure why
this should be --- is it possible that the distribution of keys in
symptom_reports is wildly uneven?  This could happen if all of the
physically earlier rows in symptom_reports contain the same small set
of symptom_ids, but the stats don't seem to indicate such a skew.

			regards, tom lane


[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Home]     [Yosemite]

Powered by Linux