| From: | David Rysdam <drysdam(at)ll(dot)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | bricklen <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: nested query vs left join: query planner very confused |
| Date: | 2013-11-27 16:37:24 |
| Message-ID: | 87pppl7qd7.fsf@loud.llan.ll.mit.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 11:06:51 -0500, bricklen <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Has the client ANALYZEd recently? What happens if the client issues
> the following commands before executing the query?
> VACUUM ANALYZE lp.sigs;
> VACUUM ANALYZE lp.mags;
>
> If that doesn't change the plan, could you post the values for
> effective_cache_size, shared_buffers, random_page_cost,
> cpu_tuple_cost, work_mem and how much RAM is in the client machine?
Yes, I did have them do a vacuum analyze with no result. Here's their
reply on configuration:
It is 24 Gig.
effective_cache_size - 12000MB
shared_buffers - 1024MB
random_page_cost - is commented out
cpu_tuple_cost - commented out
work_mem - commented out
I assume you guys already know the default values for those last 3 on a
9.0.x server...
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Johnston | 2013-11-27 16:38:04 | Re: Complex sql, limit-for-each group by, arrays, updates |
| Previous Message | David Rysdam | 2013-11-27 16:34:34 | Re: nested query vs left join: query planner very confused |