X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1566F9DD694 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 12:34:51 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 72498-01 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 12:34:48 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE62A9DD69E for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 12:34:47 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jB1GYkoh011680; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 11:34:46 -0500 (EST) To: "Markus Wollny" cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Queries taking ages in PG 8.1, have been much faster in PG<=8.0 In-reply-to: <28011CD60FB1724DBA4442E38277F6264A62C1@hermes.computec.de> References: <28011CD60FB1724DBA4442E38277F6264A62C1@hermes.computec.de> Comments: In-reply-to "Markus Wollny" message dated "Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:30:42 +0100" Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 11:34:46 -0500 Message-ID: <11679.1133454886@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 required=5 tests=[none] X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/25 X-Sequence-Number: 15846 "Markus Wollny" writes: >> Once you're not under deadline, >> I'd like to investigate more closely to find out why 8.1 does >> worse than 8.0 here. > Please tell me what I can do to help in clearing up this issue, I'd be > very happy to help! The first thing to do is get 8.0's EXPLAIN ANALYZE for the same query. After we see how that differs from 8.1, we'll know what the next question should be ... regards, tom lane