Re: Bad Query Plans on 10.3 vs 9.6

From: Cory Tucker <cory(dot)tucker(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bad Query Plans on 10.3 vs 9.6
Date: 2018-03-29 15:08:49
Message-ID: CAG_=8kBKebY6A+xTmGvM95B3q41xLtGQoJjckV8VzH=L2t_pUw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

>
> Each table in your database has an entry in the pg_class table. Something
> like:
>
> SELECT relallvisible from pg_class where oid = 'build.household'::regclass;
>
> would show you the value, however, I think a problem here is unlikely
> since that would just control the likelihood of an index-only-scan vs
> an index-scan. You're getting a Seq-scan, which I imagine is going to
> be quite a bit more expensive than even an index scan.
>

relallvisible has a value of 0 for that table on both databases.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ravi Krishna 2018-03-29 15:21:36 Question about AWS Calculator
Previous Message David Rowley 2018-03-29 14:26:38 Re: Bad Query Plans on 10.3 vs 9.6