PostgreSQL – How to Create a Graph Connecting Predecessors and Successors in Time from a Timeseries Table

You write:

Each customer can have multiple sites, but only one should be displayed in this list.

Yet, your query retrieves all rows. That would be a point to optimize. But you also do not define which site is to be picked.

Either way, it does not matter much here. Your EXPLAIN shows only 5026 rows for the site scan (5018 for the customer scan). So hardly any customer actually has more than one site. Did you ANALYZE your tables before running EXPLAIN?

From the numbers I see in your EXPLAIN, indexes will give you nothing for this query. Sequential table scans will be the fastest possible way. Half a second is rather slow for 5000 rows, though. Maybe your database needs some general performance tuning?

Maybe the query itself is faster, but "half a second" includes network transfer? EXPLAIN ANALYZE would tell us more.

If this query is your bottleneck, I would suggest you implement a materialized view.

After you provided more information I find that my diagnosis pretty much holds.

The query itself needs 27 ms. Not much of a problem there. "Half a second" was the kind of misunderstanding I had suspected. The slow part is the network transfer (plus ssh encoding / decoding, possibly rendering). You should only retrieve 100 rows, that would solve most of it, even if it means to execute the whole query every time.

If you go the route with a materialized view like I proposed you could add a serial number without gaps to the table plus index on it - by adding a column row_number() OVER (<your sort citeria here>) AS mv_id.

Then you can query:

SELECT *
FROM   materialized_view
WHERE  mv_id >= 2700
AND    mv_id <  2800;

This will perform very fast. LIMIT / OFFSET cannot compete, that needs to compute the whole table before it can sort and pick 100 rows.

pgAdmin timing

When you execute a query from the query tool, the message pane shows something like:

Total query runtime: 62 ms.

And the status line shows the same time. I quote pgAdmin help about that:

The status line will show how long the last query took to complete. If a dataset was returned, not only the elapsed time for server execution is displayed, but also the time to retrieve the data from the server to the Data Output page.

If you want to see the time on the server you need to use SQL EXPLAIN ANALYZE or the built in Shift + F7keyboard shortcut or Query -> Explain analyze. Then, at the bottom of the explain output you get something like this:

Total runtime: 0.269 ms

It should be int. The referencing and the refernced columns have to be of the same datatype but it doesn't make sense for a serial to reference another serial because serials are just int with auto incrementing values provided by a sequence.

And when you will be inserting in the second, referencing table (client), you'll want to use the values already inserted in the 1st, referenced table (user). You don't want automatically provided values as these may not match the existing values you already have in the 1st table.

The Postgres docs about numeric datatypes explain:

The data types smallserial, serial and bigserial are not true types, but merely a notational convenience for creating unique identifier columns (similar to the AUTO_INCREMENT property supported by some other databases). In the current implementation, specifying:

CREATE TABLE tablename (
    colname SERIAL
);

is equivalent to specifying:

CREATE SEQUENCE tablename_colname_seq;
CREATE TABLE tablename (
    colname integer NOT NULL DEFAULT nextval('tablename_colname_seq')
);
ALTER SEQUENCE tablename_colname_seq OWNED BY tablename.colname;