Reputation: 3
I have this query which is rather slow for my liking :
select * from "cams" where
"bust" is not null and
"figure" is not null and
"age" is not null and
"hair" is not null and
"ethnicity" is not null
and "status" = 'online' and
"cams"."deleted_at" is null
order by ethnicity = 'white' DESC,
age = 22 DESC,
(age >= 18 AND age <= 35) DESC,
bust = 'medium' DESC,
figure = 'petite' DESC,
hair = 'blonde' DESC
limit 10
Explain analyse output
Limit (cost=10045.82..10045.84 rows=10 width=318) (actual time=754.187..754.190 rows=10 loops=1)
-> Sort (cost=10045.82..10047.15 rows=532 width=318) (actual time=754.182..754.183 rows=10 loops=1)
Sort Key: ((ethnicity = 'white'::ethnicity)) DESC, ((age = 22)) DESC, (((age >= 18) AND (age <= 35))) DESC, ((bust = 'medium'::bust)) DESC, ((figure = 'petite'::figure)) DESC, ((hair = 'blonde'::hair_color)) DESC
Sort Method: top-N heapsort Memory: 33kB
-> Bitmap Heap Scan on cams (cost=1328.15..10034.32 rows=532 width=318) (actual time=580.008..745.590 rows=5092 loops=1)
Recheck Cond: ((hair IS NOT NULL) AND (age IS NOT NULL) AND (status = 'online'::cam_status))
Filter: ((bust IS NOT NULL) AND (figure IS NOT NULL) AND (ethnicity IS NOT NULL) AND (deleted_at IS NULL))
Rows Removed by Filter: 2414
Heap Blocks: exact=49643
-> Bitmap Index Scan on cams_online_rank_age (cost=0.00..1328.02 rows=2406 width=0) (actual time=567.587..567.587 rows=4715231 loops=1)
Index Cond: ((hair IS NOT NULL) AND (age IS NOT NULL))
Planning Time: 1.526 ms
Execution Time: 754.464 ms
Is there an index I can put on to speed this up (bearing in mind that the values for the order by will be dynamic)? I was thinking a partial index on where bust,figure,age,hair ethnicity is not null and status = 'online' but then not sure what column to rank on as the order by is dynamic (I'm trying to find the post similar item to a certain item).
Upvotes: 0
Views: 28
Reputation: 1269443
Your only hope is an index on (status, deleted_at)
. That at least matches the equality conditions in the where
clause. If you know that another column has a high proportion of null
values, you can include that as a third key.
This may limit the scanning of the table. However, the performance may be more based on the sorting for the order by
than scanning the table.
Upvotes: 1