On 02/01/2011 06:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Nicos Panayides<ni...@magneta.com.cy>  writes:
On 01/31/2011 08:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
It seems likely that you're getting a different plan for the generic
case because that user id isn't representative of the overall average
for the column.
I tried the prepared statement with both $1 and 1811 for user_id and
here's the plans I got:
[ bad ]
"        ->   Seq Scan on game_round_actions  (cost=0.00..51702078.26
rows=314 width=53)"
"              Filter: ((action_time>= $2) AND (action_time<= $3) AND
(sub_action_id = 0) AND (user_id = $1))"
[ good ]
"        ->   Index Scan using i_session on game_round_actions
(cost=0.00..224166.97 rows=300 width=53)"
"              Index Cond: ((action_time>= $2) AND (action_time<= $3))"
"              Filter: (user_id = 1811)"
So the question is why it won't use that index in the parameterized case ...

CREATE INDEX i_session
    ON game_round_actions
    USING btree
    (action_time)
    WHERE user_id<>  0 AND sub_action_id = 0;
... and the answer is that it can't prove user_id<>  0 when it doesn't
know the value of the parameter equated to user_id, so it cannot build
a plan that relies on using that partial index.  (IOW, if it did use the
index, it would get the wrong answer if $1 happened to be zero.)

I don't know the reason you had for making the index partial in the
first place, but maybe you should reconsider that.  Another possibility
is to explicitly include "user_id<>  0" in the query conditions, if
you're certain that the passed-in value is never zero.

                        regards, tom lane
I added an additional user_id <> 0 and performance is normal.
I didn't know that the database does not use the value of the parameter to chose a plan. It makes sense now that
you have explained it.

The reason we use a partial index is that the table is very huge and we are really interested only in those rows. Actually the condition should have used user_id IS NOT NULL instead of <> 0. Unfortunately the index takes quite a few hours to build so we implemented the workaround you suggested for now. If the condition was "user_id IS NOT NULL AND sub_action_id=0" would postgres always chose the index since user_id = NULL will always be false?

Thank you very much for help!

--
Regards,

Nicos Panayides
IT Manager

Magneta Technologies Ltd
Tel: +357 22721919, 22317400
Fax: +357 22721917
Web: http://www.magneta.eu


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Reply via email to