Re: query reboot pgsql 9.5.1

the output is:

pba=# EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, TIMING, BUFFERS) SELECT idprodxintegrar FROM _gc_tb
a LEFT join _gc_cat b on ( b.arama <@ a.arama and a.arama <@ b.arama )
;
QUERY
PLAN
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=4) (actual
time=0.003..0.003 rows=0 loops=1)
Join Filter: ((b.arama <@ a.arama) AND (a.arama <@ b.arama))
-> Seq Scan on _gc_tb a (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=1 width=66) (actual
time=0.002..0.002 rows=0 loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on _gc_cat b (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=1 width=70) (never
executed)
Planning time: 0.206 ms
Execution time: 0.074 ms
(6 filas)

2016-03-04 15:01 GMT-06:00 David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Felipe de Jesús Molina Bravo <
> fjmolinabravo(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>>> Now i execute the same in pgsql 9.4.5 and all is fine!!!
>>>>
>>>> The EXPLAINs are:
>>>>
>>>> - pgsql 9.5.1:
>>>>
>>>> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.03..492944.81 rows=276095 width=4)
>>>> -> Seq Scan on _gc_tb a (cost=0.00..3321.30 rows=120130 width=66)
>>>> -> Bitmap Heap Scan on _gc_cat b (cost=0.03..4.06 rows=2
>>>> width=70)
>>>> Recheck Cond: ((arama <@ a.arama) AND (a.arama <@ arama))
>>>> -> Bitmap Index Scan on _gc_cat_arama_gin
>>>> (cost=0.00..0.03 rows=2 width=0)
>>>> Index Cond: ((arama <@ a.arama) AND
>>>> (a.arama <@ arama))
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - pgsql 9.4.5:
>>>> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.03..492944.81 rows=276095 width=4)
>>>> -> Seq Scan on _gc_tb a (cost=0.00..3321.30 rows=120130 width=66)
>>>> -> Bitmap Heap Scan on _gc_cat b (cost=0.03..4.06 rows=2
>>>> width=70)
>>>> Recheck Cond: ((arama <@ a.arama) AND (a.arama <@ arama))
>>>> -> Bitmap Index Scan on _gc_cat_arama_gin
>>>> (cost=0.00..0.03 rows=2 width=0)
>>>> Index Cond: ((arama <@ a.arama)
>>>> AND
>>>> (a.arama <@ arama))
>>>>
>>>
>>> The above are exactly the same, so if they are indeed from the different
>>> versions I do not see an issue. The question to ask here is whether the
>>> above are actually from the different Postgres instances?
>>>
>>>
>> yes these are differents
>>
>
> ​It would be nice to see the output of "EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, TIMING,
> BUFFERS)" so real timings can be observed.
>
>
> David J.
> ​
>
>