From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Mkrtchyan, Tigran <tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.de>
Cc: pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: 9.5alpha1 vs 9.4
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2015 10:33:25 -0400
Message-ID: <10845.1436106805@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150705125403.GD24494@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <1897514812.2949286.1436094651680.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
<20150705125403.GD24494@alap3.anarazel.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2015-07-05 13:10:51 +0200, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>> today I have update my test system to 9.5alpha1.
>> Most of the operations are ok, except delete.
>> I get ~1000 times slower!
>> 255.88 | 566.11 | 452 | DELETE FROM t_inodes WHERE ipnfsid=$1 AND inlink = ?
> That certainly should not be the case. Could you show the query plan for
> this statement in both versions?
EXPLAIN ANALYZE, please. I'm wondering about a missing index on some
foreign-key-involved column. That would show up as excessive time in
the relevant trigger ...
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.de
Subject: Re: 9.5alpha1 vs 9.4
In-Reply-To: <10845.1436106805@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox