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 19:27:13 -0600
Message-ID: <20181128012713.GF30707@telsasoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181128004402.GC30707@telsasoft.com>
References: <CAO698qZnrxoZu7MEtfiJmpmUtz3AVYFVnwzR+pqjF=rmKBTgpw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMkU=1wb5JqO9jCgp-3q-40X7c+AtTGw=CZzqF8+iBmua+geVg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAO698qZRB020VM53gU6EHEM2QcAUE=GxvMS5rWLWBnNE2ACoPA@mail.gmail.com>
<20181128004402.GC30707@telsasoft.com>
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 06:44:02PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 9:17 AM Sanyo Moura <sanyo.moura@tatic.net> 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.
>
> I was able to reproduce this behavior.
I take that back, in part..
My query (with One-Time Filter: false) has high planning time under 11.0, also:
| Result (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=0 width=24)
| One-Time Filter: false
|Time: 48335.098 ms (00:48.335)
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: <20181128012713.GF30707@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