Re: [GENERAL] Queries are taking way longer in 9.6 than 9.5

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Melvin Davidson
Тема Re: [GENERAL] Queries are taking way longer in 9.6 than 9.5
Дата
Msg-id CANu8Fiy0Ln9a8XJ+DH2NNKXAL6sLadhQGQbS_bGVZkrPaX77qg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [GENERAL] Queries are taking way longer in 9.6 than 9.5  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [GENERAL] Queries are taking way longer in 9.6 than 9.5  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-general


On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Ravi Tammineni
<rtammineni@partner.aligntech.com> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Here is the query and execution plan in 9.5 and 9.6.

Can you verify tblpuorderstatus and tblpuorderstatushistory have all
indexes accounted for on both servers?  It seems incredible server
would prefer wading through 11M records to 1298 nestloop.  I'm curious
what plans you get if you try playing around with:

set enable_seqscan=false;
set enable_hashjoin=false;

...but I think we have two possibilities here:
1. schema mismatch
2. planner bug

merlin


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

I never got an answer to my question.
Have you verified that postgresql.conf is the same of both 9.5 & 9.6?

--
Melvin Davidson
I reserve the right to fantasize.  Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Merlin Moncure
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [GENERAL] Queries are taking way longer in 9.6 than 9.5
Следующее
От: Anirudh Jayakumar
Дата:
Сообщение: [GENERAL] Read/Write operation counts