Re: [PERFORM] Performance regressions in PG 9.3 vs PG 9.0

2014-04-08 Thread uher dslij
a stable function only gets called once? Should I use a CTE to cache the result? Is there a better way? Thanks in advance, On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > uher dslij writes: > > The EXPLAINs all pretty much look like my original post. The planner in > > 9.

Re: [PERFORM] Performance regressions in PG 9.3 vs PG 9.0

2014-04-08 Thread uher dslij
values this function returns, On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > uher dslij writes: > > The EXPLAINs all pretty much look like my original post. The planner in > > 9.2 and above is simply not using bitmap heap scans or bitmap index > scans? > > What could

Re: [PERFORM] Performance regressions in PG 9.3 vs PG 9.0

2014-04-08 Thread uher dslij
post. The planner in 9.2 and above is simply not using bitmap heap scans or bitmap index scans? What could be the reason for this? Thanks in advance, On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:34 PM, uher dslij wrote: > Hi, > > We recently upgraded from pg 9.0.5 to 9.3.2 and we are observing much >

[PERFORM] Performance regressions in PG 9.3 vs PG 9.0

2014-04-07 Thread uher dslij
Hi, We recently upgraded from pg 9.0.5 to 9.3.2 and we are observing much higher load on our hot standbys (we have 3). As you can see from the query plans below, we have some queries that are running 4-5 times slower now, many due to what looks like a bad plan in 9.3. Are there any known issues