PostgreSQL 9.2
Ich versuche den Unterschied zwischen Hash Semi Joinund gerecht zu verstehen Hash Join.
Hier sind zwei Fragen:
ich
EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT * FROM orders WHERE customerid IN (SELECT
customerid FROM customers WHERE state='MD');
Hash Semi Join (cost=740.34..994.61 rows=249 width=30) (actual time=2.684..4.520 rows=120 loops=1)
Hash Cond: (orders.customerid = customers.customerid)
-> Seq Scan on orders (cost=0.00..220.00 rows=12000 width=30) (actual time=0.004..0.743 rows=12000 loops=1)
-> Hash (cost=738.00..738.00 rows=187 width=4) (actual time=2.664..2.664 rows=187 loops=1)
Buckets: 1024 Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 7kB
-> Seq Scan on customers (cost=0.00..738.00 rows=187 width=4) (actual time=0.018..2.638 rows=187 loops=1)
Filter: ((state)::text = 'MD'::text)
Rows Removed by Filter: 19813
II
EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT * FROM orders o JOIN customers c ON o.customerid = c.customerid WHERE c.state = 'MD'
Hash Join (cost=740.34..1006.46 rows=112 width=298) (actual time=2.831..4.762 rows=120 loops=1)
Hash Cond: (o.customerid = c.customerid)
-> Seq Scan on orders o (cost=0.00..220.00 rows=12000 width=30) (actual time=0.004..0.768 rows=12000 loops=1)
-> Hash (cost=738.00..738.00 rows=187 width=268) (actual time=2.807..2.807 rows=187 loops=1)
Buckets: 1024 Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 37kB
-> Seq Scan on customers c (cost=0.00..738.00 rows=187 width=268) (actual time=0.018..2.777 rows=187 loops=1)
Filter: ((state)::text = 'MD'::text)
Rows Removed by Filter: 19813
Wie zu sehen ist, besteht der einzige Unterschied in den Plänen darin, dass im ersten Fall das Hastable verbraucht 7kB, im zweiten Fall jedoch 37kBder Knoten Hash Semi Join.
Aber ich verstehe den Unterschied in der Größe der Hashtabelle nicht. Der HashKnoten verwendet perfekt denselben Seq ScanKnoten mit demselben Filter. Warum gibt es den Unterschied?
explain (analyze, verbose).