From: | Tom Duffey <tduffey(at)techbydesign(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slow query after upgrades |
Date: | 2007-12-14 14:20:24 |
Message-ID: | 7D15C939-3764-4D45-9070-352742142269@techbydesign.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Dec 13, 2007, at 7:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> writes:
>> The JDBC driver is using an unnamed statement in this case, shouldn't
>> the planner end up using index selectivity estimates based on the
>> actual
>> parameter values?
>
> If he's using a recent enough backend, it should.
>
>> From the explain output that just came through it looks like a type
>> mismatch problem on the timestamp parameter.
>
> Yeah, no question. Implicit casts to text strike again :-(. He was
> probably getting the wrong answers, not only a slow query.
What do you think about adding type information to the log? Something
like:
DETAIL: parameters: $1 = '21001'::integer, $2 = '2007-12-11
22:22:45'::text
or similar would have revealed the source of my problem earlier.
Tom
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-12-14 16:17:12 | Re: Slow query after upgrades |
Previous Message | Albert László-Róbert | 2007-12-14 11:39:21 | Re: Slow query after upgrades |