BigW Consortium Gitlab

Skip to content
  • Yorick Peterse's avatar
    41bfe82b
    Optimise searching for users using short queries · 41bfe82b
    Yorick Peterse authored
    This optimises searching for users when using queries consisting out of
    one or two characters such as "ab". We optimise such cases by searching
    for `LOWER(name)` and `LOWER(username)` instead of using `ILIKE`. Using
    `LOWER` produces a _much_ better performing query.
    
    For example, when searching for all users matching the term "a" we'd
    produce the following plan:
    
         Limit  (cost=637.69..637.74 rows=20 width=805) (actual time=41.983..41.995 rows=20 loops=1)
           Buffers: shared hit=8330
           ->  Sort  (cost=637.69..638.61 rows=368 width=805) (actual time=41.982..41.990 rows=20 loops=1)
                 Sort Key: (CASE WHEN ((name)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 0 WHEN ((username)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 1 WHEN ((email)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 2 ELSE 3 END), name
                 Sort Method: top-N heapsort  Memory: 35kB
                 Buffers: shared hit=8330
                 ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on users  (cost=75.47..627.89 rows=368 width=805) (actual time=9.452..41.305 rows=277 loops=1)
                       Recheck Cond: (((name)::text ~~* 'a'::text) OR ((username)::text ~~* 'a'::text) OR ((email)::text = 'a'::text))
                       Rows Removed by Index Recheck: 7601
                       Heap Blocks: exact=7636
                       Buffers: shared hit=8327
                       ->  BitmapOr  (cost=75.47..75.47 rows=368 width=0) (actual time=8.290..8.290 rows=0 loops=1)
                             Buffers: shared hit=691
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on index_users_on_name_trigram  (cost=0.00..38.85 rows=180 width=0) (actual time=4.369..4.369 rows=4071 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: ((name)::text ~~* 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=360
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on index_users_on_username_trigram  (cost=0.00..34.41 rows=188 width=0) (actual time=3.896..3.896 rows=4140 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: ((username)::text ~~* 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=328
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on users_email_key  (cost=0.00..1.94 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.022..0.022 rows=0 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: ((email)::text = 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=3
         Planning time: 3.912 ms
         Execution time: 42.171 ms
    
    With the changes in this commit we now produce the following plan
    instead:
    
         Limit  (cost=13257.48..13257.53 rows=20 width=805) (actual time=1.567..1.579 rows=20 loops=1)
           Buffers: shared hit=287
           ->  Sort  (cost=13257.48..13280.93 rows=9379 width=805) (actual time=1.567..1.572 rows=20 loops=1)
                 Sort Key: (CASE WHEN ((name)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 0 WHEN ((username)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 1 WHEN ((email)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 2 ELSE 3 END), name
                 Sort Method: top-N heapsort  Memory: 35kB
                 Buffers: shared hit=287
                 ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on users  (cost=135.66..13007.91 rows=9379 width=805) (actual time=0.194..1.107 rows=277 loops=1)
                       Recheck Cond: ((lower((name)::text) = 'a'::text) OR (lower((username)::text) = 'a'::text) OR ((email)::text = 'a'::text))
                       Heap Blocks: exact=277
                       Buffers: shared hit=287
                       ->  BitmapOr  (cost=135.66..135.66 rows=9379 width=0) (actual time=0.152..0.152 rows=0 loops=1)
                             Buffers: shared hit=10
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on yorick_test_users  (cost=0.00..124.75 rows=9377 width=0) (actual time=0.101..0.101 rows=277 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: (lower((name)::text) = 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=4
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on index_on_users_lower_username  (cost=0.00..1.94 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.035..0.035 rows=1 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: (lower((username)::text) = 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=3
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on users_email_key  (cost=0.00..1.94 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.014..0.014 rows=0 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: ((email)::text = 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=3
         Planning time: 0.303 ms
         Execution time: 1.687 ms
    
    Here we can see the new query is 25 times faster compared to the old
    query.
    41bfe82b
    Optimise searching for users using short queries
    Yorick Peterse authored
    This optimises searching for users when using queries consisting out of
    one or two characters such as "ab". We optimise such cases by searching
    for `LOWER(name)` and `LOWER(username)` instead of using `ILIKE`. Using
    `LOWER` produces a _much_ better performing query.
    
    For example, when searching for all users matching the term "a" we'd
    produce the following plan:
    
         Limit  (cost=637.69..637.74 rows=20 width=805) (actual time=41.983..41.995 rows=20 loops=1)
           Buffers: shared hit=8330
           ->  Sort  (cost=637.69..638.61 rows=368 width=805) (actual time=41.982..41.990 rows=20 loops=1)
                 Sort Key: (CASE WHEN ((name)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 0 WHEN ((username)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 1 WHEN ((email)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 2 ELSE 3 END), name
                 Sort Method: top-N heapsort  Memory: 35kB
                 Buffers: shared hit=8330
                 ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on users  (cost=75.47..627.89 rows=368 width=805) (actual time=9.452..41.305 rows=277 loops=1)
                       Recheck Cond: (((name)::text ~~* 'a'::text) OR ((username)::text ~~* 'a'::text) OR ((email)::text = 'a'::text))
                       Rows Removed by Index Recheck: 7601
                       Heap Blocks: exact=7636
                       Buffers: shared hit=8327
                       ->  BitmapOr  (cost=75.47..75.47 rows=368 width=0) (actual time=8.290..8.290 rows=0 loops=1)
                             Buffers: shared hit=691
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on index_users_on_name_trigram  (cost=0.00..38.85 rows=180 width=0) (actual time=4.369..4.369 rows=4071 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: ((name)::text ~~* 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=360
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on index_users_on_username_trigram  (cost=0.00..34.41 rows=188 width=0) (actual time=3.896..3.896 rows=4140 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: ((username)::text ~~* 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=328
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on users_email_key  (cost=0.00..1.94 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.022..0.022 rows=0 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: ((email)::text = 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=3
         Planning time: 3.912 ms
         Execution time: 42.171 ms
    
    With the changes in this commit we now produce the following plan
    instead:
    
         Limit  (cost=13257.48..13257.53 rows=20 width=805) (actual time=1.567..1.579 rows=20 loops=1)
           Buffers: shared hit=287
           ->  Sort  (cost=13257.48..13280.93 rows=9379 width=805) (actual time=1.567..1.572 rows=20 loops=1)
                 Sort Key: (CASE WHEN ((name)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 0 WHEN ((username)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 1 WHEN ((email)::text = 'a'::text) THEN 2 ELSE 3 END), name
                 Sort Method: top-N heapsort  Memory: 35kB
                 Buffers: shared hit=287
                 ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on users  (cost=135.66..13007.91 rows=9379 width=805) (actual time=0.194..1.107 rows=277 loops=1)
                       Recheck Cond: ((lower((name)::text) = 'a'::text) OR (lower((username)::text) = 'a'::text) OR ((email)::text = 'a'::text))
                       Heap Blocks: exact=277
                       Buffers: shared hit=287
                       ->  BitmapOr  (cost=135.66..135.66 rows=9379 width=0) (actual time=0.152..0.152 rows=0 loops=1)
                             Buffers: shared hit=10
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on yorick_test_users  (cost=0.00..124.75 rows=9377 width=0) (actual time=0.101..0.101 rows=277 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: (lower((name)::text) = 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=4
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on index_on_users_lower_username  (cost=0.00..1.94 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.035..0.035 rows=1 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: (lower((username)::text) = 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=3
                             ->  Bitmap Index Scan on users_email_key  (cost=0.00..1.94 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.014..0.014 rows=0 loops=1)
                                   Index Cond: ((email)::text = 'a'::text)
                                   Buffers: shared hit=3
         Planning time: 0.303 ms
         Execution time: 1.687 ms
    
    Here we can see the new query is 25 times faster compared to the old
    query.
Loading