po 16. 12. 2019 v 14:02 odesílatel Mariel Cherkassky <
mariel.cherkas...@gmail.com> napsal:
> I see, thank u !
> Maybe I didnt see big difference because most of my tables arent so big.
> My db`s size is 17GB and the largest table contains about 20M+ records.
>
Postgres 12 has enabled JIT by defa
I see, thank u !
Maybe I didnt see big difference because most of my tables arent so big. My
db`s size is 17GB and the largest table contains about 20M+ records.
Thanks again !
degredation after upgrade from 9.6 to 12
Hey Jeff,Andrew,
I continued testing the 12version vs the 96 version and it seems that there is
almost non diff and in some cases pg96 is faster than 12. I compared the
content of pg_stat_statements after each test that I have done and it seems
that the db
Hey Jeff,Andrew,
I continued testing the 12version vs the 96 version and it seems that there
is almost non diff and in some cases pg96 is faster than 12. I compared the
content of pg_stat_statements after each test that I have done and it seems
that the db time is almost the same and sometimes 96 i
Hi,
On 2019-11-24 15:50:20 -0500, Jeff Janes wrote:
> OK, but do you agree that a 15% slow down is more realistic than 3 fold
> one? Or are you still getting 3 fold slow down with more careful testing
> and over a wide variety of queries?
>
> I find that the main regression (about 15%) in your e
Hey Jeff,
First of all thank you again for the quick response. I really appreciate
your comments.
Unfortunately I installed pg from rpms so I cant compile my current env but
I can install it from source code and migrate the data via pg_dump. Can you
explain how can I compile the sources without thi
On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 1:05 PM Mariel Cherkassky <
mariel.cherkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Jeff,
> This example was only used to show that pg96 had better perfomance than
> pg12 in a very simple case.
>
OK, but do you agree that a 15% slow down is more realistic than 3 fold
one? Or are you s
Op 24-11-2019 om 19:05 schreef Mariel Cherkassky:
Hey Jeff,
This example was only used to show that pg96 had better perfomance
than pg12 in a very simple case.
In all the tests that I run most of the queries took less time on
9.6`s version. I dont know why, but as you can see after
disablin
Hey Jeff,
This example was only used to show that pg96 had better perfomance than
pg12 in a very simple case.
In all the tests that I run most of the queries took less time on 9.6`s
version. I dont know why, but as you can see after disabling the parameter
the simple test that I did showed diffe
On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 8:52 AM Mariel Cherkassky <
mariel.cherkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Andrew,
> It seems that changing this parameter worked for me.
> Setting it to zero means that there wont be any parallel workers for one
> query right ?
> Is it something familiar this problem with the g
On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 7:53 AM Mariel Cherkassky <
mariel.cherkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
The second machine is a clone of the first one + db upgrade to 12 beta 3
> (Yes I'm aware 12.1 was released).
>
So then fix it. Why spend time investigating obsolete software? Was
12Beta3 compiled with --ena
Hey Andrew,
It seems that changing this parameter worked for me.
Setting it to zero means that there wont be any parallel workers for one
query right ?
Is it something familiar this problem with the gatherers ?
Hi there -
I have same feelings. Try set max_parallel_workers_per_gather to zero. I don't
think that comparison non-parallel and parallel versions is correct (don't say
anything about parallel in 9.6 pls)
What explain says? I suppose you will have different exec plans. Optimizer
stranges of 11
Hello,
did you run ananlyze on your db?
Le dim. 24 nov. 2019 à 13:53, Mariel Cherkassky
a écrit :
> Hey all,
> I'm testing performance of two identical machines one in 9.6 and the
> second one is in 12. The second machine is a clone of the first one + db
> upgrade to 12 beta 3 (Yes I'm aware 12.
Hey all,
I'm testing performance of two identical machines one in 9.6 and the second
one is in 12. The second machine is a clone of the first one + db upgrade
to 12 beta 3 (Yes I'm aware 12.1 was released).
machine stats :
32gb ram
8 cpu
regular hd (not ssd)
my postgresql.confg settings:
max_wal
15 matches
Mail list logo
