Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A67DAB594F
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  8 Dec 2011 23:28:32 -0400 (AST)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) id 1RYr8Q-0007rC-Hs
	for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:28:31 +0000
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id pB93SFek014558;
	Thu, 8 Dec 2011 22:28:15 -0500 (EST)
To: kaloyan@digsys.bg
cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Slow query after upgrade from 8.2 to 8.4 
In-reply-to: <4EE0F3F4.8040909@digsys.bg> 
References: <4EE0F3F4.8040909@digsys.bg>
Comments: In-reply-to Kaloyan Iliev Iliev <kaloyan@digsys.bg>
	message dated "Thu, 08 Dec 2011 19:29:24 +0200"
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 22:28:15 -0500
Message-ID: <14557.1323401295@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -3.1 (---)
X-Archive-Number: 201112/77
X-Sequence-Number: 45876

Kaloyan Iliev Iliev <kaloyan@digsys.bg> writes:
> We recently upgrade our server from PG8.2 to 8.4.
> ...
> Here I will post explain analyze. If you think it is necessary I will 
> post the exact query:
> http://explain.depesz.com/s/J0O

Yeah, you need to show the query.  It looks like the performance problem
is stemming from a lot of subselects, but it's not clear why 8.4 would
be handling those worse than 8.2.

			regards, tom lane