From: Shaun Thomas <sthomas@optionshouse.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Daniel Burbridge <Daniel.Burbridge@publishingtechnology.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Prepared statements slow in 9.2 still (bad query plan)
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:25:15 -0500
Message-ID: <508E83BB.4060101@optionshouse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12200.1351436781@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <CA9A03D82318FE41825E250D9880D959B3BFD5@maple.VISTACOMP.COM>
<12200.1351436781@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On 10/28/2012 10:06 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> 9.2 will only pick the "right" plan if that plan's estimated cost is a
> good bit cheaper than the "wrong" parameterized plan.
Is it also possible that the planner differences between extended and
simple query mode caused this? That really bit us in the ass until
EnterpriseDB sent us a patch. From browsing the threads, didn't someone
say a similar problem existed in PG core?
--
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-444-8534
sthomas@optionshouse.com
______________________________________________
See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email
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: sthomas@optionshouse.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, Daniel.Burbridge@publishingtechnology.com
Subject: Re: Prepared statements slow in 9.2 still (bad query plan)
In-Reply-To: <508E83BB.4060101@optionshouse.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