Re: Query completed in < 1s in PG 9.1 and ~ 700s in PG 9.2 - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Query completed in < 1s in PG 9.1 and ~ 700s in PG 9.2
Date
Msg-id 10569.1352307514@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Query completed in < 1s in PG 9.1 and ~ 700s in PG 9.2  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Query completed in < 1s in PG 9.1 and ~ 700s in PG 9.2
List pgsql-performance
Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:16 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas
> <rr.rosas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This was a great guess! Congrats, Merlin:

> Heh -- that was tom's guess, not mine.  What this does is confirm the
> planner regression and that elevates the importance of Tom's request
> to get sample data so we (he) can fix it.

Well, the fact that it's a planner runtime problem and not a
quality-of-plan problem is new information (I'd been assuming the
latter).  Given that, it's possible it's already fixed:
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=ca2d6a6cef5740b29406980eb8d21d44da32634b
but I'd still want to see a test case to be sure.  In any case,
it's not clear what's the critical difference between the "fast" and
"slow" versions of the query.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Florent Guillaume
Date:
Subject: Re: Unique values across a table of arrays - documents and tags
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: How to upgrade from 9.1 to 9.2 with replication?