| From: | Kostas Papadopoulos <kostas(at)methodosit(dot)com(dot)cy> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daevor The Devoted <dollien(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Same query, same data different plan |
| Date: | 2022-10-10 15:12:11 |
| Message-ID: | 37fcbc79-c9c9-979d-f7ad-43771e7923c5@methodosit.com.cy |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 10/10/2022 17:53, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kostas Papadopoulos <kostas(at)methodosit(dot)com(dot)cy> writes:
>> I cannot see how it can be configuration since the two databases are in the same
>> Postgres instance.
>
> There is such a thing as ALTER DATABASE ... SET to install different
> settings at the per-database level.
I understand, but I created the databases to be the same. Our original problem was
that developers' workstations (Debian and Windows) were running a specific query
different from a test db (Ubuntu). After eliminating everything we thought of (data,
versions, configurations, OS, etc) we ended up with the scenario I described here.
>
> In general, the answer to your question is that the databases are
> *not* identical. You just haven't figured out how yet. I'm wondering
> if it has something to do with the dump/reload having compacted out
> bloat in the tables or indexes, causing cost estimates to change.
I will look into that and a couple of other ideas I got from this list.
>
> regards, tom lane
Thanks
kostas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2022-10-10 17:59:12 | Re: Same query, same data different plan |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-10-10 14:53:43 | Re: Same query, same data different plan |