Re: Performance issue with Pointcloud extension

On 06/09/2017 09:13 AM, Eric Lemoine wrote:
> On 06/08/2017 10:41 PM, Éric wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Have you experimented with other queries that don't involve PostGIS?
>>> I'm wondering if your hook-installation code fails to work properly
>>> unless PostGIS was loaded first. This would be easier to credit if
>>> there are hooks both extensions try to get into.
>>
>>
>> I think you're right on Tom. It looks like I cannot reproduce the issue if I start by calling a PostGIS function rather than a Pointcloud function. So it may well be a conflict between PostGIS and Pointcloud. Both use fn_extra, and that makes we wonder. This old thread [*] makes me wonder too! I still need to figure out the bug, but I can see some light now! thanks
>>
>> [*] <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/984D0F47C5FF4D0DB0D71A4F6EF670ED%40cleverelephant(dot)ca#984D0F47C5FF4D0DB0D71A4F6EF670ED(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca>
>
>
> I now think that the performance bug is not related to the fn_extra
> thing. I had hope but not anymore :) I don't see where the Pointcloud
> and PostGIS extensions could conflict.
>

Crank up the logging detail?:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/runtime-config-logging.html#RUNTIME-CONFIG-LOGGING-WHEN

log_min_messages (enum)

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/runtime-config-logging.html#RUNTIME-CONFIG-LOGGING-WHAT

log_connections (boolean)

log_disconnections (boolean)

log_duration (boolean)

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com