On Tue, 31 Jan 2023, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 8:07 AM Dimitrios Apostolou <jimis@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> -> Seq Scan on public.test_runs_raw (cost=0.00..9250235.80 rows=317603680 width=42) (actual
time=745910.672..745910.677rows=10 loops=1)
> Output: run_n, test_name_n, workitem_n, started_on, duration_ms, test_result_n, test_executable_n,
test_function_n,test_datatag_n
> Buffers: shared read=2334526
> I/O Timings: shared/local read=691137.029
>
>
> The system has to return 10 live rows to you. If it needs to search through that many buffers to find 10 live rows
youmost likely have a large bloating problem going on. Seems like it is time to vacuum full.
I looked up on how to measure bloat, so I run the query found at [1].
[1] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Show_database_bloat
The first two rows show huge bloat on the two indices of this table:
... ORDER BY wastedbytes DESC LIMIT 2;
current_database | schemaname | tablename | tbloat | wastedbytes | iname | ibloat |
wastedibytes
------------------+------------+---------------+--------+-------------+------------------------------+--------+--------------
coin | public | test_runs_raw | 1.8 | 21742305280 | test_runs_raw_pkey | 1.0 |
0
coin | public | test_runs_raw | 1.8 | 21742305280 | test_runs_raw_idx_workitem_n | 0.3 |
0
(2 rows)
Is this bloat even affecting queries that do not use the index?
It seems I have to add VACUUM FULL to nightly maintainance. I had run some
schema restructuring (several ADD COLUMN followed by UPDATE SET on all
rows) some days ago, and I was not aware this degraded the table.
Thanks for the useful info!
Dimitris