Re: [GENERAL] Inaccurate Explain Cost
Matthias <nitrogenycs@gmail.com>
From: Matthias <nitrogenycs@gmail.com>
To: depesz@depesz.com, "Jeff Janes" <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Cc: "Robert Sosinski" <rsosinski@ticketevolution.com>, pgsql-general@postgresql.org, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, "Spike Grobstein" <spike@ticketevolution.com>
Date: 2012-09-27T10:48:24Z
Lists: pgsql-performance, pgsql-general
Am 27.09.2012, 02:04 Uhr, schrieb Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:21 PM, hubert depesz lubaczewski > <depesz@depesz.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 02:38:09PM -0400, Robert Sosinski wrote: >>> The first query shows a cost of 190,169.55 and runs in 199,806.951 ms. >>> When I disable nested loop, I get a cost of 2,535,992.34 which runs in >>> only 133,447.790 ms. We have run queries on our database with a cost >>> of 200K cost before and they ran less then a few seconds, which makes >>> me wonder if the first query plan is inaccurate. The other issue is >>> understanding why a query plan with a much higher cost is taking less >>> time to run. >> >> Are you under impression that cost should be somehow related to actual >> time? > > I am certainly under that impression. If the estimated cost has > nothing to do with run time, then what is it that the cost-based > optimizer is trying to optimize? See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/runtime-config-query.html section "18.7.2. Planner Cost Constants". -Matthias