El lun, 08-02-2016 a las 10:04 +, Gustav Karlsson escribió:
> Additional information:
>
> The problematic row has likely received many hot updates (100k+).
> Could this be a likely explanation for the high execution time?
>
>
Could you check if autovacuum is doing its job with this query:
se
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:04 PM, Gustav Karlsson
wrote:
> Additional information:
>
> The problematic row has likely received many hot updates (100k+). Could
> this be a likely explanation for the high execution time?
>
Query immediately after the bulk updates before VACUUM will take longer
time.