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
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 |