Total RAM = 1G is correct
This query executes as the result of a search from our Network Management
System Device Audit web tool where the date range is large and is focused on a
specific device.
I was thinking it should execute more quickly since syslog.ip has an index and
we're not performing any textual matching.
EXPLAIN:
QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hash Join (cost=408.53..1962721.39 rows=98068 width=126) (actual
time=30121.265..3419306.752 rows=1929714 loops=1)
Hash Cond: (public.syslog_master.ip = public.devices.ip)
-> Nested Loop (cost=209.67..1120466.90 rows=37316116 width=122) (actual
time=30117.845..3416690.561 rows=1929714 loops=1)
Join Filter: (public.syslog_master.ip = public.devices.ip)
-> HashAggregate (cost=205.40..205.41 rows=1 width=7) (actual
time=5.133..5.142 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..205.40 rows=1 width=7) (actual
time=4.117..5.124 rows=1 loops=1)
Join Filter: ((public.devices.hostgroup)::text =
(mongroups.hostgroup)::text)
-> Seq Scan on devices (cost=0.00..202.80 rows=1
width=14) (actual time=4.088..5.075 rows=1 loops=1)
Filter: ((id <> 1291) AND ((active = 't'::bpchar) OR
(active = 's'::bpchar)) AND ((((hostname)::text || '.'::text) ||
(hostpop)::text) ~* 'pe1.mel4'::text))
-> Seq Scan on mongroups (cost=0.00..1.71 rows=71
width=6) (actual time=0.009..0.017 rows=71 loops=1)
-> Append (cost=4.27..1114378.69 rows=470624 width=115) (actual
time=30112.646..3415201.052 rows=1929766 loops=1)
-> Bitmap Heap Scan on syslog_master (cost=4.27..9.61 rows=2
width=72) (actual time=0.027..0.027 rows=0 loops=1)
Recheck Cond: (public.syslog_master.ip = public.devices.ip)
Filter: ((public.syslog_master.datetime <= '2013-08-01
00:00:00'::timestamp without time zone) AND (public.syslog_master.datetime >=
'2013-04-12 00:00:00'::timestamp without time zone))
-> Bitmap Index Scan on syslog_master_ip_idx
(cost=0.00..4.27 rows=2 width=0) (actual time=0.019..0.019 rows=0 loops=1)
Index Cond: (public.syslog_master.ip =
public.devices.ip)
-> Bitmap Heap Scan on syslog_201307 syslog_master
(cost=4175.37..355209.50 rows=150004 width=112) (actual
time=30112.618..686289.128 rows=297015 loops=1)
Recheck Cond: (public.syslog_master.ip = public.devices.ip)
Filter: ((public.syslog_master.datetime <= '2013-08-01
00:00:00'::timestamp without time zone) AND (public.syslog_master.datetime >=
'2013-04-12 00:00:00'::timestamp without time
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-performance-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-performance-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of David Johnston
Sent: Thursday, 3 October 2013 10:47 AM
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] 57 minute SELECT
Samuel Stearns-2 wrote
> Total RAM - 1G
>
>
> 1. Explain on SELECT.
So either this is a typo (1 GB of RAM) or your query is likely ending up I/O
bound.
You should probably provide EXPLAIN and EXPLAIN (ANALYZE) output since even
with the schema it is impossible for someone to see what the planner is
proposing for a multiple-million record source table that is going to be empty
if all someone does is create the schema.
For my money it is also helpful to actual write some prose describing what you
are providing and seeing and not just toss some settings and schema out there.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SlowQueryQuestions
David J.
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/57-minute-SELECT-tp5773169p5773174.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
