I analyzed all tables involved after loading, and also while trying to diagnose this issue.
I have the same statistics target settings on both servers.
Here are the schemas for the tables:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Adam Brusselback <adambrusselback@gmail.com> writes: > Hey all, testing out 9.6 beta 1 right now on Debian 8.5. > I have a query that is much slower on 9.6 than 9.5.3.
The rowcount estimates in 9.6 seem way off. Did you ANALYZE the tables after loading them into 9.6? Maybe you forgot some statistics target settings?
If it's not that, I wonder whether the misestimates are connected to the foreign-key-based estimation feature. Are there any FKs on the tables involved? May we see the table schemas?