I'm new to Postgres and even newer to understanding how explain works. I have a query below which is typical, I just replace the date:
explain
select account_id,
security_id,
market_value_date,
sum(market_value) market_value
from market_value_history mvh
inner join holding_cust hc on hc.id = mvh.owning_object_id
where
hc.account_id = 24766
and market_value_date = '2015-07-02'
and mvh.created_by = 'HoldingLoad'
group by account_id, security_id, market_value_date
order by security_id, market_value_date;
Attached is a screenshot of explain The count for holding_cust table is 2 million rows and market_value_history table has 163 million rows
Below are the table definitions and indexes for market_value_history and holding_cust:
I'd appreciate any advice you may be able to give me on tuning this query.
CREATE TABLE public.market_value_history
(
id integer NOT NULL DEFAULT nextval('market_value_id_seq'::regclass),
market_value numeric(18,6) NOT NULL,
market_value_date date,
holding_type character varying(25) NOT NULL,
owning_object_type character varying(25) NOT NULL,
owning_object_id integer NOT NULL,
created_by character varying(50) NOT NULL,
created_dt timestamp without time zone NOT NULL,
last_modified_dt timestamp without time zone NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT market_value_history_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id)
)
WITH (
OIDS=FALSE
);
ALTER TABLE public.market_value_history
OWNER TO postgres;
-- Index: public.ix_market_value_history_id
-- DROP INDEX public.ix_market_value_history_id;
CREATE INDEX ix_market_value_history_id
ON public.market_value_history
USING btree
(owning_object_type COLLATE pg_catalog."default", owning_object_id);
-- Index: public.ix_market_value_history_object_type_date
-- DROP INDEX public.ix_market_value_history_object_type_date;
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX ix_market_value_history_object_type_date
ON public.market_value_history
USING btree
(owning_object_type COLLATE pg_catalog."default", owning_object_id, holding_type COLLATE pg_catalog."default", market_value_date);
CREATE TABLE public.holding_cust
(
id integer NOT NULL DEFAULT nextval('holding_cust_id_seq'::regclass),
account_id integer NOT NULL,
security_id integer NOT NULL,
subaccount_type integer,
trade_date date,
purchase_date date,
quantity numeric(18,6),
net_cost numeric(18,2),
adjusted_net_cost numeric(18,2),
open_date date,
close_date date,
created_by character varying(50) NOT NULL,
created_dt timestamp without time zone NOT NULL,
last_modified_dt timestamp without time zone NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT holding_cust_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id)
)
WITH (
OIDS=FALSE
);
ALTER TABLE public.holding_cust
OWNER TO postgres;
-- Index: public.ix_holding_cust_account_id
-- DROP INDEX public.ix_holding_cust_account_id;
CREATE INDEX ix_holding_cust_account_id
ON public.holding_cust
USING btree
(account_id);
-- Index: public.ix_holding_cust_acctid_secid_asofdt
-- DROP INDEX public.ix_holding_cust_acctid_secid_asofdt;
CREATE INDEX ix_holding_cust_acctid_secid_asofdt
ON public.holding_cust
USING btree
(account_id, security_id, trade_date DESC);
-- Index: public.ix_holding_cust_security_id
-- DROP INDEX public.ix_holding_cust_security_id;
CREATE INDEX ix_holding_cust_security_id
ON public.holding_cust
USING btree
(security_id);
-- Index: public.ix_holding_cust_trade_date
-- DROP INDEX public.ix_holding_cust_trade_date;
CREATE INDEX ix_holding_cust_trade_date
ON public.holding_cust
USING btree
(trade_date);
Two things:
market_value_date
field. Its possible that post that you have a completely different query plan, which may or may not bring up other bottlenecks, but it should certainly remove this seq-Scan
.TEXT
. As can be seen in the query, its trying to cast all createdby fields to TEXT
for this query.