Re: Slow statement using parallelism after 9.6>11 upgrade

From: "Arnaud L(dot)" <arnaud(dot)listes(at)codata(dot)eu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Slow statement using parallelism after 9.6>11 upgrade
Date: 2019-09-03 14:06:06
Message-ID: 938dfead-0605-8f91-8f21-8871f44bd6ff@codata.eu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Le 03/09/2019 à 15:43, Tom Lane a écrit :
> "Arnaud L." <arnaud(dot)listes(at)codata(dot)eu> writes:
>> We have upgraded our database from 9.6 to 11 (and updated PostGIS from
>> 2.3 to 2.5 as well).
>> ...
>
> Have you re-ANALYZEd the database? The problem with this query
> seems to be the spectacularly awful rowcount estimate here:

You mean after the upgrade process ? Yes I have.
I've juste re-run "ANALYZE table" to rule this out, estimates are the same.

Maybe some statistic target problem ? Estimated number of rows is
284.196.352
Also, this is a GIN index on a bigint[] column.

I've setup parallel_tuple_cost to 1.0 parallel_setup_cost to 5000.0 for
the time being which solves this specific problem. These value don't
look very sensible though, they are very high compared to the default ones.

Cheers
--
Arnaud

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Paul Ramsey 2019-09-03 14:39:41 Re: Slow statement using parallelism after 9.6>11 upgrade
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-09-03 13:43:11 Re: Slow statement using parallelism after 9.6>11 upgrade