Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([98.129.198.125])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <rocron@pssd.com>) id 1TSx4B-0000z3-BU
	for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:40:15 +0000
Received: from sam.nabble.com ([216.139.236.26])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <rocron@pssd.com>) id 1TSx46-0006Th-67
	for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:40:14 +0000
Received: from [192.168.236.26] (helo=sam.nabble.com)
	by sam.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <rocron@pssd.com>) id 1TSx44-0002sB-Ml
	for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:40:08 -0700
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:40:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: robcron <rocron@pssd.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Message-ID: <1351546808698-5729991.post@n5.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAFj8pRDqi6tgopU4iAVx-=1ujwSjhKcCNQWRq2jES5ZR5Hp4yA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1351276200087-5729749.post@n5.nabble.com>
	<1901.1351281512@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1351283186158-5729764.post@n5.nabble.com>
	<1351285016309-5729768.post@n5.nabble.com>
	<CAFj8pRDqi6tgopU4iAVx-=1ujwSjhKcCNQWRq2jES5ZR5Hp4yA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Slower Performance on Postgres 9.1.6 vs 8.2.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/)
X-Archive-Number: 201210/361
X-Sequence-Number: 48320

Thank you all for your replies.

I did figure out what is going on.

9.1 is indeed faster than 8.2.11 so we are good to go forward.

Thank you again



--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Slower-Performance-on-Postgres-9-1-6-vs-8-2-11-tp5729749p5729991.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.