X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFEC39DCC47 for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:56:49 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 15523-09 for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:56:49 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05D2D9DCC89 for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:56:46 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k27JukFO002877; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 14:56:46 -0500 (EST) To: Scott Marlowe cc: Alvaro Herrera , andremachado , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: firebird X postgresql 8.1.2 windows, performance In-reply-to: <1141751939.18820.174.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> References: <20060307162842.M37264@techforce.com.br> <1141751333.18820.172.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> <20060307171514.GE6748@surnet.cl> <1141751939.18820.174.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> Comments: In-reply-to Scott Marlowe message dated "Tue, 07 Mar 2006 11:18:59 -0600" Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 14:56:45 -0500 Message-ID: <2876.1141761405@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.112 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.112] X-Spam-Score: 0.112 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/77 X-Sequence-Number: 17514 Scott Marlowe writes: > So, do you see any obvious, low hanging fruit here? It would help if we were being told the whole truth about the settings being used. The first few plans are clearly suffering from the "enable_seqscan = off" error, but the last few don't seem to be. I don't trust the SHOW ALL at all since it disagrees with the immediately following retail SHOWs --- there is seemingly a whole lot of parameter changing going on that we are not being told about. It'd also be a good idea to know something about the datatypes involved, particularly for the join keys. regards, tom lane