Re: Significant Execution Time Difference Between PG13.14 and PG16.4 for Query on information_schema Tables.

From: nikhil raj <nikhilraj474(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, NIKITA PATEL <patelnikita1411(at)gmail(dot)com>, Patel Khushbu <patelkhushbu2067(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Significant Execution Time Difference Between PG13.14 and PG16.4 for Query on information_schema Tables.
Date: 2024-08-26 22:41:36
Message-ID: CAG1ps1zFv7gHc1-7dxXfFeNvoaENW5WDJ_DrJsZNJk72HvEABw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Hi Adrian,

Thanks for the quick response.

I've already performed a vacuum, reindex, and analyze on the entire
database, but the issue persists. As you can see from the execution plan,
the time difference in PostgreSQL 16 is still significantly higher, even
after all maintenance activities have been completed.
It seems there might be a bug in PostgreSQL 16 where the performance of
queries on *information_schema* tables is degraded. As both the tables are
postgres system tables

https://explain.depesz.com/s/bdO6b :-PG13
<https://explain.depesz.com/s/bdO6b>
https://explain.depesz.com/s/bpAU :- PG16
<https://explain.depesz.com/s/bpAU>

On Tue 27 Aug, 2024, 3:40 AM Adrian Klaver, <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
wrote:

> On 8/26/24 14:49, nikhil raj wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I've encountered a noticeable difference in execution time and query
> > execution plan row counts between PostgreSQL 13 and PostgreSQL 16 when
> > running a query on |information_schema| tables. Surprisingly, PostgreSQL
> > 16 is performing slower than PostgreSQL 13.
>
> Did you run ANALYZE on the Postgres 16 instance?
>
> > *4PostgreSQL 13.14 (PostgreSQL 13.14 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by
> > gcc 11.4.0, 64-bit)*
> > Execution plan: PG13.14 Execution Plan
> > <https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/ag1a62a9d47dg29d>
> >
> > *PostgreSQL 16.4 (PostgreSQL 16.4 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by
> > gcc 11.4.0, 64-bit)*
> > Execution plan: PG16.4 Execution Plan
> > <https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/4c66fdfbf2hf9ed2>
>
>
> Use:
>
> https://explain.depesz.com/
>
> It is easier to follow it's output.
>
> >
> >
> > Has anyone else experienced similar behavior or could provide insights
> > into why PostgreSQL 16 might be slower for this query? Any advice or
> > suggestions for optimization would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Yes when ANALYZE was not run on a new instance.
>
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
> > NOTE:- PFA the raw file of explain and analyze below.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Travers 2024-08-27 00:23:39 Re: Code of Conduct Committee Volunteer Drive
Previous Message Adrian Klaver 2024-08-26 22:10:06 Re: Significant Execution Time Difference Between PG13.14 and PG16.4 for Query on information_schema Tables.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Smith 2024-08-26 23:07:10 Re: Conflict detection and logging in logical replication
Previous Message Adrian Klaver 2024-08-26 22:10:06 Re: Significant Execution Time Difference Between PG13.14 and PG16.4 for Query on information_schema Tables.