Dear Adrian,
Sorry, there is an error in the email just replied, the version of PostgreSQL
is wrong.
PostgreSQL 8.4 → PostgreSQL 8.2
At 2022-08-19 12:42:54, "gzh" wrote:
Dear Adrian,
I appreciate your reply. Your reply gave me a new idea,
it should not be the problem that the
Dear Adrian,
I appreciate your reply. Your reply gave me a new idea,
it should not be the problem that the lower() function causes the unique index
to fail.
I checked the postgresql.conf file and found that shared_buffers, work_mem and
maintenance_work_mem are default value,
but in the pos
On 8/18/22 02:50, gzh wrote:
Dear Tom,
Thanks for your reply.
Please refer to the information below：
I run following sql in PostgreSQL 8.2 and PostgreSQL 12.5, it returns
different execution plan.
There are ~13 years of improvements to the planner and the database as a
whole, I would mo
But you should do that according to the documentation:
...
After restoring a backup, it is wise to run ANALYZE on each database so the
query optimizer has useful statistics.
...
Dear Adrian,
Thanks for your reply.
>Did you run ANALYZE on the 12.5 server after restoring the data to it?
No, I did not run ANALYZE on the 12.5 server after restoring the data.
When I change the select clause like this ( crew_base.crewid → count(*) ), I
can retrieve the number of data r
Dear David,
Thanks for your reply.
>In addition to that, I couldn't help notice that the quoted SQL does
>not seem to belong to the explain. The EXPLAIN has a Limit node, but
>the query does not. I'm assuming this isn't due to the relations being
>views since we don't pull up subqueries with a L
Dear Tom,
Thanks for your reply.
Please refer to the information below：
PostgreSQL 8.2
[root@PostgreSQL8 ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release
CentOS release 6.6 (Final)
[root@PostgreSQL8 ~]# locale | grep LANG
LANG=ja_JP.UTF-8
PostgreSQL 12.5
[root@Postgr
On 8/17/22 20:01, gzh wrote:
Hi,
I have had a Perl Website working for 7 years and have had no problems
until a few weeks ago I replaced my database server with a newer one.
Did you run ANALYZE on the 12.5 server after restoring the data to it?
gzh
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.kla...@akl
On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 15:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> The 12.5 plan looks like it thinks that the join condition is not
> hashable --- and probably not mergeable as well, else it would have
> done a mergejoin. This is odd if we assume that the lower()
> outputs are just text. But you haven't said anyt
gzh writes:
> I run following sql in PostgreSQL 8.2 and PostgreSQL 12.5, it returns
> different execution plan.
8.2 is ... well, not stone age maybe, but pretty durn ancient.
You really ought to update a bit more often than that. (And
maybe pay more attention to staying up to date with minor re
Hi,
I have had a Perl Website working for 7 years and have had no problems
until a few weeks ago I replaced my database server with a newer one.
Database server (old): PostgreSQL 8.2 32bit
Database server (new): PostgreSQL 12.5 64bit
I run following sql in PostgreSQL 8.2 and PostgreS
11 matches
Mail list logo
