On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 7:40 AM Adrian Klaver <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com> wrote:
> On 5/7/20 4:19 AM, Amarendra Konda wrote: > > Hi, > > > > PostgreSQL version : PostgreSQL 9.6.2 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled > > by gcc (GCC) 4.8.3 20140911 (Red Hat 4.8.3-9), 64-bit > > > > We have noticed huge difference interms of execution plan ( response > > time) , When we pass the direct values Vs inner query to IN clause. > > > > High level details of the use case are as follows > > > > * As part of the SQL there are 2 tables named Process_instance > > (master) and Process_activity ( child) > > * Wanted to fetch TOP 50 rows from Process_activity table for the > > given values of the Process_instance. > > * When we used Inner Join / Inner query ( query1) between parent > > table and child table , LIMIT is not really taking in to account. > > Instead it is fetching more rows and columns that required, and > > finally limiting the result > > It is doing what you told it to do which is SELECT all > process_instance_i's for user_id='317079413683604' and app_id = > '427380312000560' and then filtering further. I am going to guess that > if you run the inner query alone you will find it returns ~23496 rows. > You might have better results if you an actual join between > process_activity and process_instance. Something like below(obviously > not tested): > What the OP seems to want is a semi-join: (not tested) SELECT pa.process_activity_id FROM process_activity pa WHERE pa.app_id = '427380312000560' AND pa.created > '1970-01-01 00:00:00' AND EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM process_instance pi WHERE pi.app_id = pa.app_id AND pi.user_id = '317079413683604' ) ORDER BY pa.process_instance_id, pa.created limit 50; I'm unsure exactly how this will impact the plan choice but it should be an improvement, and in any case more correctly defines what it is you are looking for. David J.
