Effektiv forespørgsel i en enorm tidsserietabel for én række hvert 15. minut

I 15 minutters intervaller:

with i as (
    select cf.tagindex, min(dateandtime) dateandtime
    from contfloattable cf
    group by
        floor(extract(epoch from dateandtime) / 60 / 15),
        cf.tagindex
)
select cf.dateandtime, cf."Val", cf.status, t.tagname
from
    contfloattable cf
    inner join
    conttagtable t on cf.tagindex = t.tagindex
    inner join
    i on i.tagindex = cf.tagindex and i.dateandtime = cf.dateandtime
order by cf.dateandtime, t.tagname

Vis forklaringsoutputtet for denne forespørgsel (hvis det virker), så vi kan forsøge at optimere. Du kan skrive det i dette svar.

Forklar output

"Sort  (cost=15102462177.06..15263487805.24 rows=64410251271 width=57)"
"  Sort Key: cf.dateandtime, t.tagname"
"  CTE i"
"    ->  HashAggregate  (cost=49093252.56..49481978.32 rows=19436288 width=12)"
"          ->  Seq Scan on contfloattable cf  (cost=0.00..38528881.68 rows=1408582784 width=12)"
"  ->  Hash Join  (cost=270117658.06..1067549320.69 rows=64410251271 width=57)"
"        Hash Cond: (cf.tagindex = t.tagindex)"
"        ->  Merge Join  (cost=270117116.39..298434544.23 rows=1408582784 width=25)"
"              Merge Cond: ((i.tagindex = cf.tagindex) AND (i.dateandtime = cf.dateandtime))"
"              ->  Sort  (cost=2741707.02..2790297.74 rows=19436288 width=12)"
"                    Sort Key: i.tagindex, i.dateandtime"
"                    ->  CTE Scan on i  (cost=0.00..388725.76 rows=19436288 width=12)"
"              ->  Materialize  (cost=267375409.37..274418323.29 rows=1408582784 width=21)"
"                    ->  Sort  (cost=267375409.37..270896866.33 rows=1408582784 width=21)"
"                          Sort Key: cf.tagindex, cf.dateandtime"
"                          ->  Seq Scan on contfloattable cf  (cost=0.00..24443053.84 rows=1408582784 width=21)"
"        ->  Hash  (cost=335.74..335.74 rows=16474 width=44)"
"              ->  Seq Scan on conttagtable t  (cost=0.00..335.74 rows=16474 width=44)"

Det ser ud til, at du har brug for dette indeks:

create index cf_tag_datetime on contfloattable (tagindex, dateandtime)

Kør analyze efter at have oprettet det. Bemærk nu, at ethvert indeks på en stor tabel vil have en betydelig præstationsindvirkning på dataændringer (indsæt osv.), da det skal opdateres ved hver ændring.

Opdater

Jeg tilføjede cf_tag_datetime-indekset (tagindex,dateandtime), og her er den nye forklaring:

"Sort  (cost=15349296514.90..15512953953.25 rows=65462975340 width=57)"
"  Sort Key: cf.dateandtime, t.tagname"
"  CTE i"
"    ->  HashAggregate  (cost=49093252.56..49490287.76 rows=19851760 width=12)"
"          ->  Seq Scan on contfloattable cf  (cost=0.00..38528881.68 rows=1408582784 width=12)"
"  ->  Hash Join  (cost=270179293.86..1078141313.22 rows=65462975340 width=57)"
"        Hash Cond: (cf.tagindex = t.tagindex)"
"        ->  Merge Join  (cost=270178752.20..298499296.08 rows=1408582784 width=25)"
"              Merge Cond: ((i.tagindex = cf.tagindex) AND (i.dateandtime = cf.dateandtime))"
"              ->  Sort  (cost=2803342.82..2852972.22 rows=19851760 width=12)"
"                    Sort Key: i.tagindex, i.dateandtime"
"                    ->  CTE Scan on i  (cost=0.00..397035.20 rows=19851760 width=12)"
"              ->  Materialize  (cost=267375409.37..274418323.29 rows=1408582784 width=21)"
"                    ->  Sort  (cost=267375409.37..270896866.33 rows=1408582784 width=21)"
"                          Sort Key: cf.tagindex, cf.dateandtime"
"                          ->  Seq Scan on contfloattable cf  (cost=0.00..24443053.84 rows=1408582784 width=21)"
"        ->  Hash  (cost=335.74..335.74 rows=16474 width=44)"
"              ->  Seq Scan on conttagtable t  (cost=0.00..335.74 rows=16474 width=44)"

Det ser ud til at være steget med tiden :( Men hvis jeg fjerner ordren efter klausul (ikke lige hvad jeg har brug for, men ville fungere), er det hvad der sker, stor reduktion:

"Hash Join  (cost=319669581.62..1127631600.98 rows=65462975340 width=57)"
"  Hash Cond: (cf.tagindex = t.tagindex)"
"  CTE i"
"    ->  HashAggregate  (cost=49093252.56..49490287.76 rows=19851760 width=12)"
"          ->  Seq Scan on contfloattable cf  (cost=0.00..38528881.68 rows=1408582784 width=12)"
"  ->  Merge Join  (cost=270178752.20..298499296.08 rows=1408582784 width=25)"
"        Merge Cond: ((i.tagindex = cf.tagindex) AND (i.dateandtime = cf.dateandtime))"
"        ->  Sort  (cost=2803342.82..2852972.22 rows=19851760 width=12)"
"              Sort Key: i.tagindex, i.dateandtime"
"              ->  CTE Scan on i  (cost=0.00..397035.20 rows=19851760 width=12)"
"        ->  Materialize  (cost=267375409.37..274418323.29 rows=1408582784 width=21)"
"              ->  Sort  (cost=267375409.37..270896866.33 rows=1408582784 width=21)"
"                    Sort Key: cf.tagindex, cf.dateandtime"
"                    ->  Seq Scan on contfloattable cf  (cost=0.00..24443053.84 rows=1408582784 width=21)"
"  ->  Hash  (cost=335.74..335.74 rows=16474 width=44)"
"        ->  Seq Scan on conttagtable t  (cost=0.00..335.74 rows=16474 width=44)"

Jeg har endnu ikke prøvet dette indeks... vil dog gøre det. standby.

Nu ser jeg på det igen, tror jeg, at det omvendte indeks kunne være endnu bedre, da det ikke kun kan bruges i Merge Join men også i den endelige Sort :

create index cf_tag_datetime on contfloattable (dateandtime, tagindex)