AW: CTE with JOIN of two tables is much faster than a regular query

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От
Тема AW: CTE with JOIN of two tables is much faster than a regular query
Дата
Msg-id 005301d436e3$cb120960$61361c20$@gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: CTE with JOIN of two tables is much faster than a regular query  (Andreas Kretschmer <andreas@a-kretschmer.de>)
Ответы Re: AW: CTE with JOIN of two tables is much faster than a regularquery  (Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>)
Список pgsql-general

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Andreas Kretschmer <andreas@a-kretschmer.de>
> Gesendet: Samstag, 18. August 2018 12:27

> Am 18.08.2018 um 11:36 schrieb kpi6288@gmail.com:
> > What can I do to improve the performance of the regular query without
> > using a CTE?
>
> try to rewrite it to a subselect:
>
> select ... from ... join (selec ... from ... where ...) x on ...
>

Do mean like this?

EXPLAIN ANALYSE
SELECT F.oID, D.szText
FROM F
JOIN (SELECT Doc.uDocID, Doc.szText FROM Doc WHERE szText ILIKE '%480GB%')
AS D ON D.uDocID = F.uDocRef;

Just as bad as my regular query:

"Hash Join  (cost=8006.56..8694.93 rows=5 width=359) (actual
time=66777.898..66784.630 rows=10 loops=1)"
"  Hash Cond: (f.udocref = doc.udocid)"
"  ->  Seq Scan on f  (cost=0.00..566.05 rows=32605 width=32) (actual
time=0.002..3.563 rows=32605 loops=1)"
"  ->  Hash  (cost=8006.32..8006.32 rows=19 width=359) (actual
time=66777.471..66777.471 rows=16 loops=1)"
"        Buckets: 1024  Batches: 1  Memory Usage: 19kB"
"        ->  Seq Scan on doc  (cost=0.00..8006.32 rows=19 width=359) (actual
time=9013.317..66777.438 rows=16 loops=1)"
"              Filter: (sztext ~~* '%480GB%'::text)"
"              Rows Removed by Filter: 125930"
"Planning time: 236.354 ms"
"Execution time: 66784.651 ms"



В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andreas Kretschmer
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: CTE with JOIN of two tables is much faster than a regular query
Следующее
От: Adrian Klaver
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: AW: CTE with JOIN of two tables is much faster than a regularquery