From: | Andomar <andomar(at)aule(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Monitoring query plan cache |
Date: | 2014-12-21 22:57:53 |
Message-ID: | 54975071.4020103@aule.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> psycopg2 sends the SQL you feed it straight to the DB. If you don't feed it a
> PREPARE statement [1] it'll be an ad-hoc query; the value placeholders will be
> interpolated prior to statement submission by psycopg2.
Thanks, that confirms what I saw during tests.
> If you're seeing that output then planning happened. The only way you get
> a cached plan for a client-issued SQL statement is if the client uses
> PREPARE/EXECUTE or the "extended query" protocol (parse/bind/execute).
> Neither of those cases would go through here.
So if there was a cached plan, there is no "LOG: PLANNER STATISTICS".
That is helpful, thanks.
> Well, at 132 microseconds apiece, it does not seem from this example that
> repeat planning is a huge problem for you ... of course, some of your
> statements might take longer, but you've not demonstrated here that you
> have anything to worry about.
Well that was just an example query, but checking a realistic query on a
test machine shows 15ms spent on query analysis. For 200 queries/sec
that would keep around 3 CPU's busy, which is what we saw. I will try to
verify that using the log_planner_stats option.
Cheers,
Andomar
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | AlexK987 | 2014-12-21 23:57:06 | Re: Is my understanding of bitmap index scans and recheck cond correct? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-12-21 18:08:34 | Re: Monitoring query plan cache |