Re: query not scaling

From: Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: query not scaling
Date: 2017-10-26 13:11:01
Message-ID: C530D204-4FAC-4CCC-8FE4-DCB04E28DDD7@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> On Oct 26, 2017, at 1:02 AM, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
>
> Rob Sargent wrote:
>> I have a query I cannot tame and I'm wondering if there's an alternative
>> to the "between" clause I'm using. Perhaps a custom type could do
>> better? I've tried the "<@" orperator and that changes the query plan
>> significantly but the execution cost/time is not improved.
>>
>> Any suggestion or pointers much appreciated.
>
> You really need EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) output to be able to
> undersrand what is going on.
>
> A couple of simple things to check:
>
> - Have all tables been ANALYZED beforehand?
> - Are all optimizer database parameters identical?
>
> Also, to have PostgreSQL inline the function, which would be good
> for performance, it should be declared IMMUTABLE.
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
The explain analyze was (maybe is)still running but without buffers.
Thought of the immutable bit. Will be doing that test.
All tables vacuumed and analyzed with each structural change.
Thanks

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marcio Farah 2017-10-26 14:00:58 Function
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-10-26 12:41:31 Re: Making subscribers read only in Postgres 10 logical replication