On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Schmitz, David
wrote:
> So how should we proceed with this issue?
I think Tom nailed it.
...Robert
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-perfo
eund;
>pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
>Betreff: Re: [PERFORM] performance penalty between Postgresql
>8.3.8 and 8.4.1
>
>On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:27 AM, Schmitz, David
> wrot
>> that is exactly the problem postgresql 8.4.1 does not consider the
>> primary key but in
Robert Haas writes:
> I can think of a couple of possible explanations for the behavior you're
> seeing:
The reason it's switching from a nestloop to something else is pretty
obvious: the estimate of the number of rows coming out of the lower
join has gone from 81 to 60772. Neither of which is r
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:27 AM, Schmitz, David wrot
> that is exactly the problem postgresql 8.4.1 does not consider the primary
> key but instead calculates
> a hash join. This can only result in poorer performance. I think this is a
> bug.
Your statement that "this can only result in poorer p
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Craig Ringer
wrote:
> On 8/12/2009 6:11 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
>
>> Your output shows that the xdf_admin_hierarchy tables between versions
>> are drastically different. 8.3.8 only contains 1 row, whereas 8.4.1
>> contains 84211 rows.
>
> That's just because one of t
lto:cr...@postnewspapers.com.au]
>Gesendet: Dienstag, 8. Dezember 2009 13:12
>An: Thom Brown
>Cc: Schmitz, David; Andres Freund; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
>Betreff: Re: [PERFORM] performance penalty between Postgresql
>8.3.8 and 8.4.1
>
>On 8/12/2009 6:11 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
>
On 8/12/2009 6:11 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
Your output shows that the xdf_admin_hierarchy tables between versions
are drastically different. 8.3.8 only contains 1 row, whereas 8.4.1
contains 84211 rows.
That's just because one of them is doing a nested loop where it looks up
a single row from x
and...@anarazel.de]
>Gesendet: Dienstag, 8. Dezember 2009 11:29
>An: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
>Cc: Schmitz, David
>Betreff: Re: [PERFORM] performance penalty between Postgresql
>8.3.8 and 8.4.1
>
>Hi David,
>
>On Tuesday 08 December 2009 10:59:51 Schmitz, David wr
Hi David,
On Tuesday 08 December 2009 10:59:51 Schmitz, David wrote:
> >> With our data it is a performance difference from 1h16min
> >> (8.3.8) to 2h43min (8.4.1)
> On Postgresql 8.4.1
> Total runtime: 101.446 ms
> and on Postgresql 8.3.8:
> Total runtime: 29.366 ms
Hm. There obviously is more g
...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 8. Dezember 2009 11:12
An: Schmitz, David
Cc: Andres Freund; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Betreff: Re: [PERFORM] performance penalty between Postgresql 8.3.8 and
8.4.1
2009/12/8 Schmitz, David
> loops=722)
> Index Cond: (la.link_id = rl.link_id)
> -> Index Scan using pk_xdf_admin_hierarchy on xdf_admin_hierarchy
> ah (cost=0.00..0.28 rows=1 width=12) (actual time=0.003..0.004 rows=1
> loops=1444)
> Index Cond: (ah.admin_place_id = la
ngliche Nachricht-
>Von: Andres Freund [mailto:and...@anarazel.de]
>Gesendet: Dienstag, 8. Dezember 2009 00:25
>An: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
>Cc: Schmitz, David
>Betreff: Re: [PERFORM] performance penalty between Postgresql
>8.3.8 and 8.4.1
>
>Hi David,
>
>O
gt;An: Kevin Grittner
>Cc: Schmitz, David; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
>Betreff: Re: [PERFORM] performance penalty between Postgresql
>8.3.8 and 8.4.1
>
>On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Kevin Grittner
> wrote:
>> "Schmitz, David" wrote:
>>
>>>
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
> "Schmitz, David" wrote:
>
>> It is carried out with poor performance on postgresql 8.4.1
>> However postgresql 8.3.8 performs just fine.
>> If you take a closer look at the query with EXPLAIN, it becomes
>> obvious, that postgresql 8.4 does
Hi David,
On Monday 07 December 2009 23:05:14 Schmitz, David wrote:
> With our data it is a performance difference from 1h16min (8.3.8) to
> 2h43min (8.4.1)
Can you afford a explain analyze run overnight or so for both?
Andres
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postg
...@wicourts.gov]
Gesendet: Mo 07.12.2009 23:19
An: Schmitz, David; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc:
Betreff:Re: [PERFORM] performance penalty between Postgresql 8.3.8 and
8.4.1
"Schmitz, David" wrote:
> It is carried out with poor performance on postgresql 8.
"Schmitz, David" wrote:
> It is carried out with poor performance on postgresql 8.4.1
> However postgresql 8.3.8 performs just fine.
> If you take a closer look at the query with EXPLAIN, it becomes
> obvious, that postgresql 8.4 does not consider the primary key at
> level 3 and instead generat
17 matches
Mail list logo
