Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([98.129.198.125]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TSpLF-0002Cn-Cm for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:25:21 +0000 Received: from smtp2.peak6.com ([38.98.137.9]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TSpLC-0007uD-MK for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:25:20 +0000 X-AuditID: 0a02cb20-b7f726d000005255-15-508e83bc7429 Received: from sswchi5pcas2.peak6.net (sswchi5pcas2.peak6.net [10.100.13.24]) by smtp2.peak6.com (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id EC.E5.21077.CB38E805; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:25:17 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [10.10.201.64] (10.10.201.64) by sswchi5pcas2.peak6.net (10.100.13.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.247.3; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:25:16 -0500 Message-ID: <508E83BB.4060101@optionshouse.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:25:15 -0500 From: Shaun Thomas Reply-To: Organization: Peak6 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121011 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane CC: Daniel Burbridge , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Prepared statements slow in 9.2 still (bad query plan) References: <12200.1351436781@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <12200.1351436781@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.10.201.64] X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprJKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXClcIrobu3uS/A4P8lDovLi7ewWVyfeY7Z 4tSqu0wOzB4X9k1j92j9pOyx6NlGlgDmqAZGm8S8vPySxJJUhZTU4mRbJf+Cksz8vGKP/NLi VAWXzOLknMTM3NQiJYXMFFslYyWFgpzE5NTc1LwSW6XEgoLUvBQlOy4FDGADVJaZp5Cal5yf kpmXbqvkGeyva2FhaqlrqGQXjwwSOlky7kzYx1awhaWi6/BB5gbGQ8xdjJwcEgImEr1zl7NA 2GISF+6tZ+ti5OIQEjjBKHG36x4TSEJIYCWjxP279SA2r4C+xN0/59lBbBYBVYm3XcfBmtkE dCUm9a9gg6hXkeg7ewOsl19AWGLfhyawZaICYRLLd25mgpgjKHFy5hOwXhEBBYm+B+/YQRYz C3QySszpmgqWEBbwlbg1pRtqaKbEtMadYIs5gZZ9fDIDrIZZwFbiwpzrULa8xPa3c5gh6lUl VjRPZIP4TEHi/5V3TBMYRWYh2T0LSfssJO0LGJlXMYoXlyUmZ2SaFRTnlhQY6RWkJmab6eWl lmxiBMU/02mFHYybe6wOMQpwMCrx8Bp87A0QYk0sK67MPcQowcGsJMLb39QXIMSbklhZlVqU H19UmpNafIjRBxhoE5mlRJPzgakpryTe0NjUwNTS1NDU3NTQCIewkjjvpdttAUIC6cD0k52a WpBaBDOOiYNTqoExyjN81dRINvtkhpmyCiqK5+SYI7N6Z3V1ZzGf8lFbNiUzrvmQee2jl5/U s47UiElcTd21LfHS0U9Hn6b83ruFs//OhX+3E6fNZlqU9E3+VPG71A2ZLwoCAqSNp/mJNUxz fR6v2vxSWSBV9P42z11PNj+dr+Tr1OYi8m4j15I109KmluxS+7NFiaU4I9FQi7moOBEAEqND zywDAAA= X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201210/346 X-Sequence-Number: 48305 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