PostgreSQL 11.9/11.10 または 12.5 には、WHERE-CLAUSE または ON-CLAUSE を使用して結合を記述できる単純なステートメントがあります。意味はまったく同じなので、返される行数も同じです。ただし、別の説明計画を受け取ります。テーブル内のデータが増えると、1 つの実行プランが非常に悪くなります。PostgreSQL がこの状況で異なる Explain プランを選択する理由を理解したいと考えています。何か案は？
サンプルデータをいくつか作成しましょう。
CREATE TABLE t1 (
t1_nr int8 NOT NULL,
name varchar(60),
CONSTRAINT t1_pk PRIMARY KEY (t1_nr)
);
INSERT INTO t1 (t1_nr, name) SELECT s, left(md5(random()::text), 10) FROM generate_series(1, 1000000) s; -- 1 million records
CREATE TABLE t2 (
t2_nr int8 NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT t2_pk PRIMARY KEY (t2_nr)
);
INSERT INTO t2 (t2_nr) SELECT s FROM generate_series(1, 10000000) s; -- 10 million records
CREATE TABLE t3 (
t1_nr int8 NOT NULL,
t2_nr int8 NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT t3_pk PRIMARY KEY (t2_nr, t1_nr)
);
INSERT INTO t3 (t1_nr, t2_nr) SELECT (s-1)/10+1, s FROM generate_series(1, 10000000) s; -- 10 t2 records per t1 records --> 10 million records
完全に分析された統計による私たちの声明：
EXPLAIN (BUFFERS, ANALYZE)
SELECT t1.*
FROM t1 t1
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM t3 t3
JOIN t2 t2 ON t2.t2_nr = t3.t2_nr
--AND t3.t1_nr = t1.t1_nr /* GOOD (using ON-CLAUSE) */
WHERE t3.t1_nr = t1.t1_nr /* BAD (using WHERE-CLAUSE) */
)
LIMIT 1000
「GOOD」行 (ON-CLAUSE) を含む説明計画:
QUERY PLAN |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Limit (cost=0.00..22896.86 rows=1000 width=19) (actual time=0.028..4.801 rows=1000 loops=1) |
Buffers: shared hit=8015 |
-> Seq Scan on t1 (cost=0.00..11448428.92 rows=500000 width=19) (actual time=0.027..4.725 rows=1000 loops=1) |
Filter: (SubPlan 1) |
Buffers: shared hit=8015 |
SubPlan 1 |
-> Nested Loop (cost=0.87..180.43 rows=17 width=0) (actual time=0.004..0.004 rows=1 loops=1000) |
Buffers: shared hit=8008 |
-> Index Only Scan using t3_pk on t3 (cost=0.43..36.73 rows=17 width=8) (actual time=0.002..0.002 rows=1 loops=1000)|
Index Cond: (t1_nr = t1.t1_nr) |
Heap Fetches: 1000 |
Buffers: shared hit=4003 |
-> Index Only Scan using t2_pk on t2 (cost=0.43..8.45 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=0.002..0.002 rows=1 loops=1000) |
Index Cond: (t2_nr = t3.t2_nr) |
Heap Fetches: 1000 |
Buffers: shared hit=4005 |
Planning Time: 0.267 ms |
Execution Time: 4.880 ms |
「BAD」行 (WHERE-CLAUSE) を含む説明計画:
QUERY PLAN |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Limit (cost=1166.26..7343.42 rows=1000 width=19) (actual time=16.888..75.809 rows=1000 loops=1) |
Buffers: shared hit=51883 read=11 dirtied=2 |
-> Merge Semi Join (cost=1166.26..3690609.61 rows=597272 width=19) (actual time=16.887..75.703 rows=1000 loops=1) |
Merge Cond: (t1.t1_nr = t3.t1_nr) |
Buffers: shared hit=51883 read=11 dirtied=2 |
-> Index Scan using t1_pk on t1 (cost=0.42..32353.42 rows=1000000 width=19) (actual time=0.010..0.271 rows=1000 loops=1) |
Buffers: shared hit=12 |
-> Gather Merge (cost=1000.89..3530760.13 rows=9999860 width=8) (actual time=16.873..74.064 rows=9991 loops=1) |
Workers Planned: 2 |
Workers Launched: 2 |
Buffers: shared hit=51871 read=11 dirtied=2 |
-> Nested Loop (cost=0.87..2375528.14 rows=4166608 width=8) (actual time=0.054..14.275 rows=4309 loops=3) |
Buffers: shared hit=51871 read=11 dirtied=2 |
-> Parallel Index Only Scan using t3_pk on t3 (cost=0.43..370689.69 rows=4166608 width=16) (actual time=0.028..1.495 rows=4309 loops=3)|
Heap Fetches: 12927 |
Buffers: shared hit=131 read=6 |
-> Index Only Scan using t2_pk on t2 (cost=0.43..0.48 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=0.002..0.002 rows=1 loops=12927) |
Index Cond: (t2_nr = t3.t2_nr) |
Heap Fetches: 12927 |
Buffers: shared hit=51740 read=5 dirtied=2 |
Planning Time: 0.475 ms |
Execution Time: 75.947 ms |