Re: test / live environment, major performance difference

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christo Du Preez <christo(at)mecola(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: test / live environment, major performance difference
Date: 2007-06-12 16:09:46
Message-ID: 8385.1181664586@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Christo Du Preez <christo(at)mecola(dot)com> writes:
> On my laptop the explain analyze looks like this:

> "Index Scan using fki_layertype_parentid on layertype (cost=0.00..8.27
> rows=1 width=109)"
> " Index Cond: (parentid = 300)"

OK ...

> and on the problem server:

> "Seq Scan on layertype (cost=0.00..20.39 rows=655 width=110)"
> " Filter: (parentid = 300)"

The server thinks that every row of the table matches the WHERE clause.
That being the case, it's making the right choice to use a seqscan.
The question is why is the rows estimate so far off? Have you ANALYZEd
the table lately?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bill Moran 2007-06-12 16:25:55 Re: VACUUM vs auto-vacuum daemon
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-06-12 16:08:02 Re: VACUUM vs auto-vacuum daemon