On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:20:42PM -0700, pavan95 wrote:
> Hi Justin,
>
> Please find the below explain plan link.
>
> Link: https://explain.depesz.com/s/owE
That's explain analyze but explain(analyze,buffers) is better.
Is this on a completely different server than the previous plans ?
Th
Hi Justin,
Please find the below explain plan link.
Link: https://explain.depesz.com/s/owE
Any help is appreciated. Thanks in Advance.
Regards,
Pavan
--
Sent from:
http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-performance-f2050081.html
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 07:03:18AM -0700, pavan95 wrote:
> Please find the explain plan which got increased again vastly. Is this
> because of the increase in rows?
>
> Link : https://explain.depesz.com/s/Ifr
That's explain without "analyze", so not very useful.
There's handful of questions:
>> At which commit ID?
83fcc615020647268bb129cbf86f7661feee6412 (5/6)
>>do you mean that these were separate PostgreSQL clusters, and they were all
>>running the same query and they all crashed like this?
A few worker nodes, a table is hash partitioned by "aTable.did" by
Citus, and further partit
Hi Justin,
>How big is the table ? And curract_state_isfinal_app_idx ?
>Have these been reindexed (or pg_repacked) recently?
The size of the table 'tms_workflow_history' is 7600Kb(which is pretty
small). Yes those indexes were dropped and recreated.
>It looks like you resolved the bad estima
Hi Matthew,
Yeah and you said right!. I have analyzed the entire database and also
created appropriate indexes for the columns used in WHERE/JOIN clauses.
Okay I will just provide the fourth union part of the query which you can
analyze easier(this not that big).
Please find the query part. And
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:01:06AM -0700, pavan95 wrote:
> As said, created index on the res_users.res_employee_id and the below link
> is the explain plan result.
>
> Link: https://explain.depesz.com/s/hoct
>
> And the cost of Previous query is 92,129 and the cost of current modified
> query af
Hi Pavan,
that's quite a big query. I can see that the generate_series function is
getting repeatedly called and the planner estimates for this sub query are
out by a factor of 66. You might try to re-write using a WITH query. I am
assuming that you have already analyzed all the tables and also add
Hi all/Justin,
As said, created index on the res_users.res_employee_id and the below link
is the explain plan result.
Link: https://explain.depesz.com/s/hoct .
And the cost of Previous query is 92,129 and the cost of current modified
query after creating the above said index is 91,462. But go
