Re: Query Performance Issue

On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 10:25:47PM +0300, neslişah demirci wrote: > Have this explain analyze output : > > *https://explain.depesz.com/s/Pra8a * On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 07:58:28PM +1300, David Rowley wrote: > On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 at 04:32, Justin Pryzby wrote:

Re: Query Performance Issue

On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 at 04:32, Justin Pryzby wrote: > I think the solution is to upgrade (at least) to PG10 and CREATE STATISTICS > (dependencies). Unfortunately, I don't think that'll help this situation. Extended statistics are currently only handled for base quals, not join quals. See dependenc

Re: Query Performance Issue

On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 10:25:47PM +0300, neslişah demirci wrote: > Have this explain analyze output : > > *https://explain.depesz.com/s/Pra8a * Row counts are being badly underestimated leading to nested loop joins: |Index Scan using product_content_recommend

Re: Query Performance Issue

*https://explain.depesz.com/s/Pra8a* Could you share the query itself please? And the tables definitions including indexes. work_mem : 8MB That's not a lot. The 16-batches hash join may have worked faster if you had resources to increase work_mem.

Re: psql cli tool and connection pooling

Hi D.J., Hope this helps. Generally, I tend to think of it like there are three separate features provided by connection poolers: Connection pooling, where you are trying to save connection overhead Offloading read-only queries to standby’s Delivering transparent client failover, where you can f