On Nov 7, 2024, at 9:54 PM, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
> On 11/8/24 09:45, Ed Sabol wrote:
>> On Nov 7, 2024, at 9:27 PM, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
>>> Postgres didn't want Materialize in this example because of the low
>>> estimation on its outer subquery. AFAIC,
On Nov 7, 2024, at 9:27 PM, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
> Postgres didn't want Materialize in this example because of the low
> estimation on its outer subquery. AFAIC, by increasing the *_page_cost's
> value, you added extra weight to the inner subquery and shifted the decision
> to use materialisa
On Nov 7, 2024, at 5:18 PM, David Rowley wrote:
> It's impossible to say with the given information. You didn't mention
> which version you upgraded from to start with.
Sorry, 15.6 to 15.7 to 15.8, but we weren't on 15.7 for very long before 15.8.
> You can set random_page_cost for just the sess
Hello! I have a database installation that goes back about 10 years. It's using
a hardware RAID consisting of enterprise-caliber spinning drives. I upgraded
the installation to PostgreSQL 15.8 a couple months ago.
Sometime after that, it was noticed that one of our application's queries
suffere
