Follow-up · depth 2
What metrics prove Query Execution Plans is healthy in prod?
What metrics prove Query Execution Plans is healthy in prod?
Answers use simple, clear English.
Audio N/AQuick interview answer
Prove Query Execution Plans is healthy with latency (p50/p95/p99), error/saturation rates, and queue/event-loop lag — not just CPU. Context: Baseline: Optimizer chooses join order, access paths (seek vs scan), and algorithms (hash vs merge join). EXPLAIN/EXPLAIN ANALYZE shows estimated vs actual rows — key for tuning.
Detailed answer
Production health signals for Query Execution Plans: • Latency: p50/p95/p99 of the critical path that uses Query Execution Plans. • Errors: failure rate, timeouts, and retry storms. • Saturation: queue depth, event-loop delay, thread/pool utilization. • Business SLIs: request success and user-visible freshness where relevant. Trade-off lens: Pros: Visual plan reveals missing indexes and bad estimates. Cons: Plans vary by engine; hints are last resort. Explain thresholds + alerts, then how you triage. Parent context: Baseline: Optimizer chooses join order, access paths (seek vs scan), and algorithms (hash vs merge join). EXPLAIN/EXPLAIN ANALYZE shows estimated vs actual rows — key for tuning.
Full explanation
Good answers name measurable signals and what “bad” looks like for Query Execution Plans. Optimizer chooses join order, access paths (seek vs scan), and algorithms (hash vs merge join). EXPLAIN/EXPLAIN ANALYZE shows estimated vs actual rows — key for tuning.
Follow-up questions
Only answered follow-ups are shown — click to open with full answers
Parent context — Query Execution Plans
Baseline: Optimizer chooses join order, access paths (seek vs scan), and algorithms (hash vs merge join). EXPLAIN/EXPLAIN ANALYZE shows estimated vs actual rows — key for tuning.
View full parent question →