Re: [PERFORM] Select with qualified join condition / Batch inserts
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 08:47 pm, Gavin Sherry wrote: > On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Bernd wrote: > > > Hi, [snip] > > Table-def: > > Table "public.scr_well_compound" > >Column | Type | Modifiers > > ++--- > > mat_id | numeric(10,0) | not null > > barcode| character varying(240) | not null > > well_index | numeric(5,0) | not null > > id_level | numeric(3,0) | not null > > compound | character varying(240) | not null > > Indexes: > > "scr_wcm_pk" PRIMARY KEY, btree (id_level, mat_id, barcode, well_index) > numeric is not optimized by postgresql like it is by Oracle. You will get much better performance by changing the numeric types to int, big int, or small int. That should get the query time down to somewhere near what Oracle is giving you. Regards Russell Smith. [snip] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [PERFORM] Select with qualified join condition / Batch inserts
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Bernd wrote: > Hi, > > we are working on a product which was originally developed against an Oracle > database and which should be changed to also work with postgres. > > Overall the changes we had to make are very small and we are very pleased with > the good performance of postgres - but we also found queries which execute > much faster on Oracle. Since I am not yet familiar with tuning queries for > postgres, it would be great if someone could give me a hint on the following > two issues. (We are using PG 8.0.0beta3 on Linux kernel 2.4.27): > > 1/ The following query takes about 5 sec. with postrgres whereas on Oracle it > executes in about 30 ms (although both tables only contain 200 k records in > the postgres version). > > SQL: > > SELECT cmp.WELL_INDEX, cmp.COMPOUND, con.CONCENTRATION > FROM SCR_WELL_COMPOUND cmp, SCR_WELL_CONCENTRATION con > WHERE cmp.BARCODE=con.BARCODE > AND cmp.WELL_INDEX=con.WELL_INDEX > AND cmp.MAT_ID=con.MAT_ID > AND cmp.MAT_ID = 3 > AND cmp.BARCODE='910125864' > AND cmp.ID_LEVEL = 1; > > Table-def: > Table "public.scr_well_compound" >Column | Type | Modifiers > ++--- > mat_id | numeric(10,0) | not null > barcode| character varying(240) | not null > well_index | numeric(5,0) | not null > id_level | numeric(3,0) | not null > compound | character varying(240) | not null > Indexes: > "scr_wcm_pk" PRIMARY KEY, btree (id_level, mat_id, barcode, well_index) I presume you've VACUUM FULL'd and ANALYZE'd? Can we also see a plan? EXPLAIN ANALYZE . http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/sql-explain.html. You may need to create indexes with other primary columns. Ie, on mat_id or barcode. > 2/ Batch-inserts using jdbc (maybe this should go to the jdbc-mailing list - > but it is also performance related ...): > Performing many inserts using a PreparedStatement and batch execution makes a > significant performance improvement in Oracle. In postgres, I did not observe > any performance improvement using batch execution. Are there any special > caveats when using batch execution with postgres? The JDBC people should be able to help with that. Gavin ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PERFORM] Select with qualified join condition / Batch inserts
Bernd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1/ The following query takes about 5 sec. with postrgres whereas on Oracle it > executes in about 30 ms (although both tables only contain 200 k records in > the postgres version). What does EXPLAIN ANALYZE have to say about it? Have you ANALYZEd the tables involved in the query? You would in any case be very well advised to change the "numeric" columns to integer, bigint, or smallint when appropriate. There is a substantial performance advantage to using the simple integral datatypes instead of the general numeric type. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [PERFORM] Select with qualified join condition / Batch inserts
> 2/ Batch-inserts using jdbc (maybe this should go to the jdbc-mailing list - > but it is also performance related ...): > Performing many inserts using a PreparedStatement and batch execution makes a > significant performance improvement in Oracle. In postgres, I did not observe > any performance improvement using batch execution. Are there any special > caveats when using batch execution with postgres? When you call executeBatch(), it doesn't send all the queries in a single round-trip; it just iterates through the batched queries and executes them one by one. In my own applications, I've done simulated-batch queries like this: insert into T (a, b, c) select 1,2,3 union all select 2,3,4 union all select 3,4,5 It's ugly, and you have to structure your code in such a way that the query can't get too large, but it provides a similar performance benefit to batching. You probably don't save nearly as much parse time as using a batched PreparedStatement, but you at least get rid of the network roundtrips. (Of course, it'd be much nicer if statement-batching worked. There have been rumblings about doing this, and some discussion on how to do it, but I haven't heard about any progress. Anyone?) mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bernd Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 5:25 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PERFORM] Select with qualified join condition / Batch inserts Hi, we are working on a product which was originally developed against an Oracle database and which should be changed to also work with postgres. Overall the changes we had to make are very small and we are very pleased with the good performance of postgres - but we also found queries which execute much faster on Oracle. Since I am not yet familiar with tuning queries for postgres, it would be great if someone could give me a hint on the following two issues. (We are using PG 8.0.0beta3 on Linux kernel 2.4.27): 1/ The following query takes about 5 sec. with postrgres whereas on Oracle it executes in about 30 ms (although both tables only contain 200 k records in the postgres version). SQL: SELECT cmp.WELL_INDEX, cmp.COMPOUND, con.CONCENTRATION FROM SCR_WELL_COMPOUND cmp, SCR_WELL_CONCENTRATION con WHERE cmp.BARCODE=con.BARCODE AND cmp.WELL_INDEX=con.WELL_INDEX AND cmp.MAT_ID=con.MAT_ID AND cmp.MAT_ID = 3 AND cmp.BARCODE='910125864' AND cmp.ID_LEVEL = 1; Table-def: Table "public.scr_well_compound" Column | Type | Modifiers ++--- mat_id | numeric(10,0) | not null barcode| character varying(240) | not null well_index | numeric(5,0) | not null id_level | numeric(3,0) | not null compound | character varying(240) | not null Indexes: "scr_wcm_pk" PRIMARY KEY, btree (id_level, mat_id, barcode, well_index) Foreign-key constraints: "scr_wcm_mat_fk" FOREIGN KEY (mat_id) REFERENCES scr_mapping_table(mat_id) ON DELETE CASCADE Table "public.scr_well_concentration" Column | Type | Modifiers ---++--- mat_id| numeric(10,0) | not null barcode | character varying(240) | not null well_index| numeric(5,0) | not null concentration | numeric(20,10) | not null Indexes: "scr_wco_pk" PRIMARY KEY, btree (mat_id, barcode, well_index) Foreign-key constraints: "scr_wco_mat_fk" FOREIGN KEY (mat_id) REFERENCES scr_mapping_table(mat_id) ON DELETE CASCADE I tried several variants of the query (including the SQL 92 JOIN ON syntax) but with no success. I have also rebuilt the underlying indices. A strange observation is that the same query runs pretty fast without the restriction to a certain MAT_ID, i. e. omitting the MAT_ID=3 part. Also fetching the data for both tables separately is pretty fast and a possible fallback would be to do the actual join in the application (which is of course not as beautiful as doing it using SQL ;-) 2/ Batch-inserts using jdbc (maybe this should go to the jdbc-mailing list - but it is also performance related ...): Performing many inserts using a PreparedStatement and batch execution makes a significant performance improvement in Oracle. In postgres, I did not observe any performance improvement using batch execution. Are there any special caveats when using batch execution with postgres? Thanks and regards Bernd ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get thro
Re: [PERFORM] Select with qualified join condition / Batch inserts
But he's testing with v8 beta3, so you'd expect the typecast problem not to appear? Are all tables fully vacuumed? Should the statistics-target be raised for some columns, perhaps? What about the config file? --Tim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Matt Clark Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 12:37 PM To: 'Bernd'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Select with qualified join condition / Batch inserts > SELECT cmp.WELL_INDEX, cmp.COMPOUND, con.CONCENTRATION > FROM SCR_WELL_COMPOUND cmp, SCR_WELL_CONCENTRATION con > WHERE cmp.BARCODE=con.BARCODE > AND cmp.WELL_INDEX=con.WELL_INDEX > AND cmp.MAT_ID=con.MAT_ID > AND cmp.MAT_ID = 3 > AND cmp.BARCODE='910125864' > AND cmp.ID_LEVEL = 1; Quick guess - type mismatch forcing sequential scan. Try some quotes: AND cmp.MAT_ID = '3' AND cmp.BARCODE='910125864' AND cmp.ID_LEVEL = '1'; M ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PERFORM] Select with qualified join condition / Batch inserts
> SELECT cmp.WELL_INDEX, cmp.COMPOUND, con.CONCENTRATION > FROM SCR_WELL_COMPOUND cmp, SCR_WELL_CONCENTRATION con > WHERE cmp.BARCODE=con.BARCODE > AND cmp.WELL_INDEX=con.WELL_INDEX > AND cmp.MAT_ID=con.MAT_ID > AND cmp.MAT_ID = 3 > AND cmp.BARCODE='910125864' > AND cmp.ID_LEVEL = 1; Quick guess - type mismatch forcing sequential scan. Try some quotes: AND cmp.MAT_ID = '3' AND cmp.BARCODE='910125864' AND cmp.ID_LEVEL = '1'; M ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
