MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CACgMzfxO7h+Bj4T8rjTV=trM3+Uw=jOAcUE+0Kimv4DSAVU1JA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHyXU0ynqbCHrw3XvofEzidHow4tx1FFGNB2FUR5-wj-EhLcNQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACgMzfwyMxq+qVFBMXzsMFFdBKJ5aRf_REX01KHL1mcVpRKwyA@mail.gmail.com> <230414d2-9a59-4395-bd81-74972c192e25@aklaver.com>
In-Reply-To: <230414d2-9a59-4395-bd81-74972c192e25@aklaver.com>
From: Ashish Mukherjee <ashish.mukherjee@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 15:03:30 +0530
Message-ID: <CACgMzfyhhBv3CfVuUPF6VviLaLLO=O3pQCgAp6BoURwJaO0aMA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Downgrade pgsql 17 to pgsql 12 question
To: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000823b8a06401590e5"
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CACgMzfyhhBv3CfVuUPF6VviLaLLO%3DO3pQCgAp6BoURwJaO0aMA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--000000000000823b8a06401590e5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think the conclusion is to do a more thorough testing before the upgrade
next time. Have updated our playbook for upgrades to include more thorough
testing.

On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 8:17=E2=80=AFPM Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklave=
r.com>
wrote:

> On 9/30/25 01:23, Ashish Mukherjee wrote:
> > Thank you all for your inputs.
> >
> > Well, Percona TDE was leading to the queries being very inefficient /
> > slow after upgrading to pgsql 17. Explain analyze shows that query
> > planning time shoots up crazily. A decision was taken to go back to
>
> How did you determine that Percona TDE was the issue vs a 5 version jump
> in Postgres?
>

*I upgraded multiple non TDE databases from v12 to v17 and they are all
fine.*

>
>
> > Now the consideration is to use some other encryption option for the
> > database which will work fine on pgsql 17. Cybertec's technology is one
> > route, the other is EDB. I am happy to hear experiences of folks here
> > with pgsql encryption options for v17 on large databases (2.5T in our
> case).
>
> Personally I would verify first that you are not hitting some more
> general issue with the 5 years of changes in Postgres since the last
> release of 12 and current release of 17.
>
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 5:10=E2=80=AFAM Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.=
com
> > <mailto:mmoncure@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
>

--000000000000823b8a06401590e5
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I think the conclusion is to do a more thorough=C2=A0=
testing before the upgrade next time. Have updated our playbook for upgrade=
s to include more thorough testing.</div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmai=
l_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, Sep 30, 20=
25 at 8:17=E2=80=AFPM Adrian Klaver &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:adrian.klaver@akl=
aver.com">adrian.klaver@aklaver.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid =
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On 9/30/25 01:23, Ashish Mukherjee wrote=
:<br>
&gt; Thank you all for your inputs.<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Well, Percona TDE was leading to the queries being very inefficient / =
<br>
&gt; slow after upgrading to pgsql 17. Explain analyze shows that query <br=
>
&gt; planning time shoots up crazily. A decision was taken to go back to <b=
r>
<br>
How did you determine that Percona TDE was the issue vs a 5 version jump <b=
r>
in Postgres?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><i>I upgraded multiple non=
 TDE databases from v12 to v17 and they are all fine.</i>=C2=A0</div><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1=
px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
<br>
&gt; Now the consideration is to use some other encryption option for the <=
br>
&gt; database which will work fine on pgsql 17. Cybertec&#39;s technology i=
s one <br>
&gt; route, the other is EDB. I am happy to hear experiences of folks here =
<br>
&gt; with pgsql encryption options for v17 on large databases (2.5T in our =
case).<br>
<br>
Personally I would verify first that you are not hitting some more <br>
general issue with the 5 years of changes in Postgres since the last <br>
release of 12 and current release of 17.<br>
<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 5:10=E2=80=AFAM Merlin Moncure &lt;<a href=3D"=
mailto:mmoncure@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">mmoncure@gmail.com</a> <br>
&gt; &lt;mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:mmoncure@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">mmo=
ncure@gmail.com</a>&gt;&gt; wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Adrian Klaver<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com" target=3D"_blank">adrian.klave=
r@aklaver.com</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>

--000000000000823b8a06401590e5--