From: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Sadeq Dousti <msdousti(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Christophe Courtois <christophe(dot)courtois(at)dalibo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Possible regression in PG18 beta1 |
Date: | 2025-05-17 18:39:43 |
Message-ID: | CAA5RZ0vnnh+5juVW9phXJYKMy3T3uifmxDKyaCiNDfG0562suA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> I'll be curious about tests with a normal table as well with a
>> sufficiently large shared_buffers.
> Here are results for a normal table with default shared_buffers (128 MB) and large shared_buffers (4GB):
thanks. I don't see regression for a normal table, at least for this test.
In terms of your original test, I tried it out on my Ubuntu machine
and with your test as-is, I see 2.8 seconds on 17.5 and 3.3 seconds
on HEAD if the plan performs a seq scan without parallelism.
However, the test as you have it is indexing all columns
on the table. If I just index on the filtered column
```
create index on t(k);
explain (analyze,buffers,costs off,timing off)
select k from t where k = 1;
```
I see similar behavior between HEAD
```
test=# explain (analyze,buffers,costs off,timing off)
select k from t where k = 1;
QUERY PLAN
---------------------------------------------------------------
Index Only Scan using t_k_idx on t (actual rows=1.00 loops=1)
Index Cond: (k = 1)
Heap Fetches: 1
Index Searches: 1
Buffers: local hit=4
Planning Time: 0.088 ms
Execution Time: 0.059 ms
```
and 17.5
```
test=# explain (analyze,buffers,costs off,timing off)
select k from t where k = 1;
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------------------------------
Index Only Scan using t_k_idx on t (actual rows=1 loops=1)
Index Cond: (k = 1)
Heap Fetches: 1
Buffers: local hit=4
Planning Time: 0.084 ms
Execution Time: 0.053 ms
(6 rows)
```
--
Sami
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sadeq Dousti | 2025-05-17 19:00:00 | Re: Possible regression in PG18 beta1 |
Previous Message | Shaik Mohammad Mujeeb | 2025-05-17 18:35:56 | Re: Add comment explaining why queryid is int64 in pg_stat_statements |