| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | johannes graën <johannes(at)selfnet(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: performance drop after upgrade (9.6 > 10) |
| Date: | 2017-10-24 16:17:15 |
| Message-ID: | 20171024161715.admzmcnbpagm6yvf@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
johannes graën wrote:
> Hi Pavel, *,
>
> you were right with ANALYZing the DB first. However, even after doing
> so, I frequently see Seq Scans where an index was used before. This
> usually cooccurs with parallelization and looked different before
> upgrading to 10. I can provide an example for 10 [1], but I cannot
> generate a query plan for 9.6 anymore.
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Slow_Query_Questions
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2017-10-24 17:13:28 | Deadlock in ALTER SUBSCRIPTION REFRESH PUBLICATION |
| Previous Message | Johannes Graën | 2017-10-24 15:57:31 | Re: performance drop after upgrade (9.6 > 10) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2017-10-26 19:45:15 | Re: performance drop after upgrade (9.6 > 10) |
| Previous Message | Johannes Graën | 2017-10-24 15:57:31 | Re: performance drop after upgrade (9.6 > 10) |