From: | "Davenport, Julie" <JDavenport(at)ctcd(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | "tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz" <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> |
Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: query taking much longer since Postgres 8.4 upgrade |
Date: | 2011-03-23 14:44:31 |
Message-ID: | FC3C063A33946548BBC77657D3A2AF750F135E00@ctc385b.campus.ctcd.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Here is the explain plan of the new query (same as original but with changes to the Date subquery to use ::date instead of to_char to truncate the time portion), when it is run after doing these 2 sets first:
set work_mem='8MB';
set enable_nestloop = false;
explain plan (8.4): http://explain.depesz.com/s/tw8
thanks again for the help.
Julie
-----Original Message-----
From: tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz [mailto:tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz]
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 11:33 AM
To: Davenport, Julie
Cc: Merlin Moncure; Tomas Vondra; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: RE: [GENERAL] query taking much longer since Postgres 8.4 upgrade
> Incredible! Setting enable_nestloop off temporarily for the run of this
> script made it run in less than a minute (had been running in 10 or 11
> minutes). I think you have found a solution for many of my slow running
> scripts that use these same type of joins. Thanks again.
> Julie
Nice. Can you post EXPLAIN ANALYZE again, so that we can see why this plan
was evaluated as as more expensive before disabling nested loops?
regards
Tomas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Johnston | 2011-03-23 14:46:24 | Re: General question |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-03-23 14:41:15 | Re: PostgreSQL documentation specifies 2-element array for float8_accum but 3-element array expected |