Hi,
postgres does a seqscan, even though there is an index present and it
should be much more efficient to use it.
I tried to synthetically reproduce it, but it won't make the same choice
when i do.
I can reproduce it with a simplified set of the data itself though.
here's the query, and the analyzed plan:
select count(*)
from d2
join g2 on g2.gid=d2.gid
where g2.k=1942
Aggregate (cost=60836.71..60836.72 rows=1 width=0) (actual
time=481.526..481.526 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Hash Join (cost=1296.42..60833.75 rows=1184 width=0) (actual
time=317.403..481.513 rows=*17* loops=1)
Hash Cond: (d2.gid = g2.gid)
-> Seq Scan on d2 (cost=0.00..47872.54 rows=3107454 width=8)
(actual time=0.013..231.707 rows=*3107454* loops=1)
-> Hash (cost=1290.24..1290.24 rows=494 width=8) (actual
time=0.207..0.207 rows=121 loops=1)
Buckets: 1024 Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 5kB
-> Index Scan using g_blok on g2 (cost=0.00..1290.24
rows=494 width=8) (actual time=0.102..0.156 rows=*121* loops=1)
Index Cond: (k = 1942)
Total runtime: 481.600 ms
Here's the DDL:
create table g2 (gid bigint primary key, k integer);
create table d2 (id bigint primary key, gid bigint);
--insert into g2 (...)
--insert into d2 (...)
create index g_blok on g2(blok);
create index d_gid on d2(gid);
alter table d2 add constraint d_g_fk foreign key (gid) references g2 (gid);
analyze d2;
analyze g2;
Any advice?
Cheers,
Willy-Bas Loos
--
"Quality comes from focus and clarity of purpose" -- Mark Shuttleworth
