Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 191846322B2 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:46:37 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32926-03 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 15:46:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99F1D62D9D2 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:46:29 -0300 (ADT) 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 o5AFkPfO017510; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:46:25 -0400 (EDT) To: Max Williams cc: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Large (almost 50%!) performance drop after upgrading to 8.4.4? In-reply-to: <0357196CB603794BB76F4F6B373F27330506EACE56@SERVER.ddnglobal.local> References: <0357196CB603794BB76F4F6B373F27330506EACE45@SERVER.ddnglobal.local> <1276158598.5764.22.camel@hp-laptop2.gunduz.org> <0357196CB603794BB76F4F6B373F27330506EACE51@SERVER.ddnglobal.local> <15383.1276179056@sss.pgh.pa.us> <0357196CB603794BB76F4F6B373F27330506EACE55@SERVER.ddnglobal.local> <4C10BB59020000250003214A@gw.wicourts.gov> <0357196CB603794BB76F4F6B373F27330506EACE56@SERVER.ddnglobal.local> Comments: In-reply-to Max Williams message dated "Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:40:06 +0100" Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:46:25 -0400 Message-ID: <17509.1276184785@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.983 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_20=-0.001, PLING_QUERY=0.994, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201006/167 X-Sequence-Number: 39023 Max Williams writes: > Ah, yes its OFF for 8.4.3 and ON for 8.4.4! Hah. > Can I just turn this off on 8.4.4 or is it a compile time option? Well, you can turn it off, but that will only buy back part of the cost (and not even the bigger part, I believe). > Also is this a mistake or intended? Perhaps I should tell the person who builds the pgdg packages?? Yes, the folks at commandprompt need to be told about this. Loudly. It's a serious packaging error. regards, tom lane