| From: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: performance regression with 9.2 |
| Date: | 2012-11-12 20:53:20 |
| Message-ID: | CADK3HHJrqgJ+U8GNCokHZPXcnMAq76zrwnVzb8omRNy=h2v-ww@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Tom,
Will try to get one ASAP.
Dave
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> writes:
> > This query is a couple orders of magnitude slower the first result is
> > 9.2.1, the second 9.1
>
> Hm, the planner's evidently doing the wrong thing inside the recursive
> union, but not obvious why. Can you extract a self-contained test case?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Willem Leenen | 2012-11-12 21:13:46 | Re: performance regression with 9.2 |
| Previous Message | Gavin Flower | 2012-11-12 20:49:38 | Re: Planner sometimes doesn't use a relevant index with IN (subquery) condition |