Thanks for the explanation!

Best Regards,
Marc-Olaf

Marc-Olaf Jaschke · Softwareentwickler
shopping24 GmbH

Werner-Otto-Straße 1-7 · 22179 Hamburg
Telefon: +49 (0) 40 6461 5830 · Fax: +49 (0) 40 64 61 7879
marc-olaf.jasc...@s24.com · www.s24.com
AG Hamburg HRB 63371
vertreten durch Dr. Björn Schäfers und Martin Mildner

2016-12-05 3:28 GMT+01:00 Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com>:

>
> > big_jsonb @> '[{"x": 1, "filler": "cfcd208495d565ef66e7dff9f98764da"}]';
>
>
>> I wonder why bitmap heap scan adds such a big amount of time on top of
>> the plain bitmap index scan.
>> It seems to me, that the recheck is active although all blocks are exact
>> [1] and that pg is loading the jsonb for the recheck.
>>
>> Is this an expected behavior?
>>
>
>
> Yes, this is expected.  The gin index is lossy.  It knows that all the
> elements are present (except when it doesn't--large elements might get
> hashed down and suffer hash collisions), but it doesn't know what the
> recursive structure between them is, and has to do a recheck.
>
> For example, if you change your example where clause to:
>
> big_jsonb @> '[{"filler": 1, "x": "cfcd208495d565ef66e7dff9f98764da"}]';
>
> You will see that the index still returns 50,000 rows, but now all of them
> get rejected upon the recheck.
>
> You could try changing the type of index to jsonb_path_ops.  In your given
> example, it won't make a difference, because you are actually counting half
> the table and so half the table needs to be rechecked.  But in my example,
> jsonb_path_ops successfully rejects all the rows at the index stage.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jeff
>

Reply via email to