X-Original-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CA2C475AFF
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 21 Feb 2003 21:47:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8:10024]) (amavisd-new) with
	SMTP id 30079-05 for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 21 Feb 2003 21:46:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 959DE475D70
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 21 Feb 2003 21:20:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h1M2Ke5u002051;
	Fri, 21 Feb 2003 21:20:40 -0500 (EST)
To: Oleg Lebedev <oleg.lebedev@waterford.org>
Cc: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: slow query 
In-reply-to: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273033583@postoffice.waterford.org>
References: <993DBE5B4D02194382EC8DF8554A5273033583@postoffice.waterford.org>
Comments: In-reply-to Oleg Lebedev <oleg.lebedev@waterford.org>
	message dated "Fri, 21 Feb 2003 09:30:53 -0700"
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 21:20:39 -0500
Message-ID: <2050.1045880439@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new
X-Archive-Number: 200302/162
X-Sequence-Number: 1218

Oleg Lebedev <oleg.lebedev@waterford.org> writes:
> Interestingly the planner statistics for this query are the same on the
> master and replica databases.
> However, query execution on the master database is about 4min. and on
> the replica database is 6 sec.!

What does EXPLAIN ANALYZE show in each case?

			regards, tom lane