On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Could you do it for the recursive > SQL (the one inside the function) like you had previously done for the > regular explain? > > Cheers, > > Jeff > Here they are: for the 65 million row table: "Index Scan using ctn_source on massive (cost=0.00..189.38 rows=1 width=28) (actual time=85.802..85.806 rows=1 loops=1)" " Index Cond: (customer_id = <some customer id>::bigint)" " Filter: (dateof <@ '["2012-07-03 14:00:00","2012-07-10 14:00:00"]'::tsrange)" " Buffers: shared read=6" "Total runtime: 85.891 ms" for the 30 million row table: "Index Scan using ctn_dateof on massive (cost=0.00..80.24 rows=1 width=24) (actual time=0.018..0.020 rows=1 loops=1)" " Index Cond: (customer_id = <some customer id>::bigint)" " Filter: (dateof <@ '[2012-07-03,2012-07-11)':: daterange)" " Buffers: shared hit=5" "Total runtime: 0.046 ms" Thank you. On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Henry Drexler <alonup...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Can you report the EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) instead? > > > > > > Thanks, here they are: > > > > for the approx 65 million row approx 50 min version: > > > > EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) > > select > > massive_expansion(ctn,the_range) > > from > > critical_visitors; > > > > "Seq Scan on critical_visitors (cost=0.00..168722.28 rows=628778 > width=40) > > (actual time=0.655..3003921.066 rows=628778 loops=1)" > > " Buffers: shared hit=4513040 read=1591722 dirtied=5234 written=10" > > "Total runtime: 3004478.053 ms" > > > > > > for the approx 30 million row approx 4 min version: > > > > EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) > > select > > massive_expansion(ctn,the_range) > > from > > critical_visitors; > > > > "Seq Scan on critical_visitors (cost=0.00..746587.90 rows=2782315 > width=40) > > (actual time=393.001..277108.379 rows=2782315 loops=1)" > > " Buffers: shared hit=26370078 read=400301 dirtied=33772 written=1030" > > "Total runtime: 278988.544 ms" > > > > I can't much sense out of those. Could you do it for the recursive > SQL (the one inside the function) like you had previously done for the > regular explain? > > Cheers, > > Jeff >
