| From: | <postgresql(at)foo(dot)me(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'postgres performance list'" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Slow query: bitmap scan troubles |
| Date: | 2012-12-06 12:56:26 |
| Message-ID: | 0b8b01cdd3b1$1a55b8b0$4f012a10$@foo.me.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
> I also wonder if increasing (say x10) of default_statistics_target or just
doing ALTER TABLE SET STATISTICS for particular tables will help.
> It will make planned to produce more precise estimations. Do not forget
ANALYZE afer changing it.
Thanks Sergey, I will try this too.
I think the bother here is that this statistics are pretty good (we do
analyse regularly and default_statistics_target is already 1000), but once I
start filtering the two tables the correlations alter quite a bit. I don't
think there is that much that can be done about that :)
- Phil
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2012-12-06 13:12:56 | Re: Commits 8de72b and 5457a1 (COPY FREEZE) |
| Previous Message | postgresql | 2012-12-06 12:52:07 | Re: Slow query: bitmap scan troubles |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | postgresql | 2012-12-06 14:10:29 | Re: Slow query: bitmap scan troubles |
| Previous Message | Andrea Suisani | 2012-12-06 12:53:23 | Re: Re: xfs perform a lot better than ext4 [WAS: Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance] |