From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Michal J(dot) Kubski" <michal(dot)kubski(at)cdt(dot)pl> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: query planning different in plpgsql? |
Date: | 2009-10-26 13:19:26 |
Message-ID: | b42b73150910260619l7727208v3dce371aaec6a562@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 6:05 AM, Michal J. Kubski <michal(dot)kubski(at)cdt(dot)pl> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:56:36 +0100, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
> <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Scott Mead
>> <scott(dot)lists(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you not have an index on last_snapshot.domain_id?
>>>
>>
>> that, and also try rewriting a query as JOIN. There might be difference
> in
>> performance/plan.
>>
> Thanks, it runs better (average 240s, not 700s) with the index. Rewriting
> queries
> as JOINs does not make any difference.
> The last_snapshot is a temp table created earlier in the procedure
> and the query in question is preceded with CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE as well,
> not a cursor.
> I still do not get why it performs differently inside the procedure.
> Is there any way to see what planning decisions were made?
not directly....can we see the function?
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michal J. Kubski | 2009-10-26 13:50:00 | Re: query planning different in plpgsql? |
Previous Message | Michal J. Kubski | 2009-10-26 10:05:23 | Re: query planning different in plpgsql? |