From: | "Gavin M(dot) Roy" <gmr(at)myyearbook(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SQL Function Slowness, 8.3.0 |
Date: | 2008-04-16 18:44:40 |
Message-ID: | af1bce590804161144q1b78be6cy69c9a44cc4b9b7bf@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
After detailed examination of pg_stat_user_indexes usage, it's clear that
the functions don't use the same indexes. I've casted everything to match
the indexes in the SQL function, to no success. Any suggestions on next
steps? Maybe for 8.4 we could find a way to explain analyze function
internals ;-)
Gavin
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Gavin M. Roy" <gmr(at)myyearbook(dot)com> writes:
> > In 8.3.0, I'm seeing some oddities with SQL functions which I thought
> were
> > immune to the planner data restrictions of plpgsql functions and the
> sort.
>
> Without a specific example this discussion is pretty content-free, but
> in general SQL functions face the same hazards of bad parameterized
> plans as plpgsql functions do.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2008-04-16 18:58:08 | Re: SQL Function Slowness, 8.3.0 |
Previous Message | Bill Moran | 2008-04-16 18:43:35 | Re: Background writer underemphasized ... |