From: | SZŰCS Gábor <surrano(at)mailbox(dot)hu> |
---|---|
To: | <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ugly query slower in 7.3, even slower after vacuum full analyze |
Date: | 2003-05-22 16:32:48 |
Message-ID: | 012e01c3207f$c80b3920$0403a8c0@fejleszt4 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Dear Tom, (or anyone who followed the belowmentioned thread)
I read that thread (more-or-less), but couldn't have noticed the same
symptoms in my analyze output. So, to summarize my reading on this (please
confirm or fix):
* The symptom is the differing width in 7.2 and 7.3
* This causes more hdd work, that takes lots of time (indeed, the hdd was
going crazy)
* The query is probably good as it is; it's 7.3 that's slow (but more
reliable than 7.2) and 7.4 will most likely fix the problem.
If all these are correct, that's enough info to me. Hopefully it'll move
from a Cel333 (the developers' server) to an IBM 2x2.4 Xeon with 5-HDD SCSI
Raid (the business server).
G.
------------------------------- cut here -------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 6:02 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] ugly query slower in 7.3, even slower after vacuum
full analyze
> "=?iso-8859-2?B?U1rbQ1MgR+Fib3I=?=" <surrano(at)mailbox(dot)hu> writes:
> > This is a rather nasty query, built up from several parameters, and it
> > proved to be 7--15 times slower in 7.3 than in 7.2.
>
> I think you are running into the same subselect-in-targetlist
> shortcoming as Eugene Fokin did:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2003-05/msg00204.php
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ernest E Vogelsinger | 2003-05-22 20:41:22 | Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-05-22 16:31:06 | Re: ugly query slower in 7.3, even slower after vacuum full analyze |