On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 3:29 PM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: >> And indeed. Comparing e.g. TPC-H, I see *massive* regressions. Some queries > are the same, sobut others regress by up to 70% (although more commonly around > 10-20%).
Hmm, that is definitely not good. > That's larger than I thought, which makes me suspect that there's some bug in > the new code. Will do a little profiling here to see if I can figure out the regression. Which build optimization settings are you seeing this under? > Interestingly, repeating the benchmark with a larger work_mem setting, the > regressions are still quite present, but smaller. I suspect the planner > chooses smarter plans which move bottlenecks more towards hashjoin code etc, > which won't be affected by this change. Interesting. > IOW, you seriously need to evaluate analytics queries before this is worth > looking at further. Makes sense, thanks for reviewing. David
