Re: PG 9..5 index performance Q's

From: Igor Neyman <ineyman(at)perceptron(dot)com>
To: ghiureai <isabella(dot)ghiurea(at)nrc-cnrc(dot)gc(dot)ca>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PG 9..5 index performance Q's
Date: 2016-11-08 18:56:30
Message-ID: MWHPR07MB2877A11BAF961713DB4CCC21DAA60@MWHPR07MB2877.namprd07.prod.outlook.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin


-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-admin-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org [mailto:pgsql-admin-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of ghiureai
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2016 1:31 PM
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: [ADMIN] PG 9..5 index performance Q's

Hi List,

running PGSQL 9.5.1 ( EL7) ,
we are seeing a issues with one of our SQL statement getting the wrong
plan once in a while ( large temp tables being generate, exec time
takes > 3 minutes compared with fastes plan < 1 min), we want to undestand why a new/ expensive plan is been used instead of efficient one, there are not data changes on the tables, any tips where to look?
Second , I would like to know if when re-creating one index ( non pk ) on a large table with already existing indexes, are All tables statistics being re-generated? ( there is a way to control persistency of old stats?)

Isabella

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Without seeing execution plans (both: fast and slow) it's hard to tell.
Auto_explain extension can help you catching these plans in PG log.
Your temp tables - are they being analyzed?

Regards,
Igor Neyman

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron Watkins 2016-11-09 18:00:24 psql remote database access
Previous Message ghiureai 2016-11-08 18:31:13 PG 9..5 index performance Q's