-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
limit is filter after scan whole posting list? #86
Comments
Now limit value can't pass to scan logical code. |
On Fri, May 22, 2020, 12:52 Digoal.zhou ***@***.***> wrote:
postgres=> insert into test_rum_add select generate_series(1,10000000), tsvector 'a b c', clock_timestamp();
INSERT 0 10000000
postgres=> create index idx_test_rum_add_1 on test_rum_add using rum (arr rum_tsvector_hash_addon_ops, ts) with (attach='ts', to='arr');
CREATE INDEX
postgres=> select * from test_rum_add where arr @@ 'a|b' order by ts <=> '2020-05-23' limit 10;
id | arr | ts
----------+-------------+----------------------------
10000000 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945628
9999999 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945628
9999998 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945627
9999997 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945627
9999996 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945626
9999995 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945625
9999994 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945624
9999993 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945624
9999992 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945623
9999991 | 'a' 'b' 'c' | 2020-05-22 17:43:01.945623
(10 rows)
postgres=> explain (analyze,verbose,timing,costs,buffers) select * from test_rum_add where arr @@ 'a|b' order by ts <=> '2020-05-23' limit 10;
QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit (cost=13.20..13.51 rows=10 width=40) (actual time=6335.531..6335.539 rows=10 loops=1)
Output: id, arr, ts, ((ts <=> '2020-05-23 00:00:00'::timestamp without time zone))
Buffers: shared hit=28705, temp read=42536 written=67010
-> Index Scan using idx_test_rum_add_1 on public.test_rum_add (cost=13.20..309926.60 rows=10000000 width=40) (actual time=6335.529..6335.534 rows=10 loops=1)
Output: id, arr, ts, (ts <=> '2020-05-23 00:00:00'::timestamp without time zone)
Index Cond: (test_rum_add.arr @@ '''a'' | ''b'''::tsquery)
Order By: (test_rum_add.ts <=> '2020-05-23 00:00:00'::timestamp without time zone)
Buffers: shared hit=28705, temp read=42536 written=67010
Planning Time: 0.050 ms
Execution Time: 6391.589 ms
(10 rows)
postgres=> explain (analyze,verbose,timing,costs,buffers) select * from test_rum_add where arr @@ 'a|b' limit 10;
QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit (cost=13.20..13.46 rows=10 width=32) (actual time=2380.119..2380.126 rows=10 loops=1)
Output: id, arr, ts
Buffers: shared hit=28706, temp read=1 written=14678
-> Index Scan using idx_test_rum_add_1 on public.test_rum_add (cost=13.20..259926.60 rows=10000000 width=32) (actual time=2380.117..2380.122 rows=10 loops=1)
Output: id, arr, ts
Index Cond: (test_rum_add.arr @@ '''a'' | ''b'''::tsquery)
Buffers: shared hit=28706, temp read=1 written=14678
Planning Time: 0.072 ms
Execution Time: 2414.058 ms
(9 rows)
i think it will improved by limit push to scan posting phase.
That would be really nice.
Limit here is a parameter for fts operator, which is impossible, but we can
wrap operator into function with limit as a parameter, the problem is that
index will not used. But we can use pg13 operator operator support
functions to rewrite internally to operator. We have experience with this
technique, but I'm wondering what are the use cases, is is worth to
implement it ?
best regards ,
… digoal
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#86>, or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABQURYXYPOMYZBHNXJVOUTDRSZDPJANCNFSM4NHUVA5Q>
.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
i think it will improved by limit push to scan posting phase.
best regards ,
digoal
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: