| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Burbridge <Daniel(dot)Burbridge(at)publishingtechnology(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Prepared statements slow in 9.2 still (bad query plan) |
| Date: | 2012-10-28 15:06:21 |
| Message-ID: | 12200.1351436781@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Daniel Burbridge <Daniel(dot)Burbridge(at)publishingtechnology(dot)com> writes:
> I have a problem with prepared statements choosing a bad query plan - I was hoping that 9.2 would have eradicated the problem :(
9.2 will only pick the "right" plan if that plan's estimated cost is a
good bit cheaper than the "wrong" parameterized plan. In this case,
not only is there not a lot of difference, but the difference is in the
wrong direction. You need to fix that --- perhaps increasing stats
targets would help?
A more radical question is whether you have a well-chosen set of indexes
in the first place. These two seem a bit odd, and certainly not
terribly well matched to this query.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Karl Denninger | 2012-10-28 15:15:45 | Re: How to upgrade from 9.1 to 9.2 with replication? |
| Previous Message | Віталій Тимчишин | 2012-10-28 03:49:25 | Re: Tons of free RAM. Can't make it go away. |