From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Sanyo Moura <sanyo.moura@tatic.net>
Cc: jeff.janes@gmail.com
Cc: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Query with high planning time at version 11.1 compared versions 10.5 and 11.0
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 15:10:22 -0600
Message-ID: <20181127211022.GA30707@telsasoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAO698qZRB020VM53gU6EHEM2QcAUE=GxvMS5rWLWBnNE2ACoPA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO698qZnrxoZu7MEtfiJmpmUtz3AVYFVnwzR+pqjF=rmKBTgpw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMkU=1wb5JqO9jCgp-3q-40X7c+AtTGw=CZzqF8+iBmua+geVg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAO698qZRB020VM53gU6EHEM2QcAUE=GxvMS5rWLWBnNE2ACoPA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 06:30:04PM -0200, Sanyo Moura wrote:
>>> I'm running performance tests for my application at version 11.1 and
>>> encountered
>>> queries with high planning time compared to the same planning, running at
>>> versions 10.5 and 11.0.
>
> Below is the script that creates one partition table:
Would you send the CREATE TABLE or \d for precio, produto, and almacen ?
Are the 2 referenced tables also empty or can you reproduce the problem if they
are (like in a separate database) ?
Do you still have an instance running 10.5 ? Or did you find the planning time
in logs (like autoexplain) ?
Are any of your catalog tables bloated or indexes fragmented ?
I assume catalog tables and their indices should all be much smaller than
shared_buffers.
SELECT relpages, relname FROM pg_class WHERE relnamespace='pg_catalog'::regnamespace ORDER BY 1 DESC LIMIT 9;
Can you compare pg_settings between the servers ? Either from a live server or
historic postgresql.conf or from memory if need be.
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Server_Configuration
Justin
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: pryzby@telsasoft.com, sanyo.moura@tatic.net, jeff.janes@gmail.com, pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Query with high planning time at version 11.1 compared versions 10.5 and 11.0
In-Reply-To: <20181127211022.GA30707@telsasoft.com>
* 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