From: Andrzej Zawadzki <zawadaa@wp.pl>
To: Matheus de Oliveira <matioli.matheus@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Slow query after upgrade from 9.0 to 9.2
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:23:01 +0100
Message-ID: <50EFCBE5.1080506@wp.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJghg4JCPzTL08HQebtB9rLu7a7xz-P63zMp_t=LheEsDge+Hw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50EEC2D5.3050602@wp.pl>
<CAJghg4JCPzTL08HQebtB9rLu7a7xz-P63zMp_t=LheEsDge+Hw@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
On 10.01.2013 19:48, Matheus de Oliveira wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Andrzej Zawadzki <zawadaa@wp.pl
> <mailto:zawadaa@wp.pl>> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Small query run on 9.0 very fast:
>
> SELECT * from sygma_arrear sar where sar.arrear_import_id = (
> select sa.arrear_import_id from sygma_arrear sa,
> arrear_import ai
> where sa.arrear_flag_id = 2
> AND sa.arrear_import_id = ai.id <http://ai.id;
> AND ai.import_type_id = 1
> order by report_date desc limit 1)
> AND sar.arrear_flag_id = 2
> AND sar.credit_id = 3102309 <tel:3102309>
>
> "Index Scan using sygma_arrear_credit_id on sygma_arrear sar
> (cost=0.66..362.03 rows=1 width=265)"
> " Index Cond: (credit_id = 3102309 <tel:3102309>)"
> " Filter: ((arrear_import_id = $0) AND (arrear_flag_id = 2))"
> " InitPlan 1 (returns $0)"
> " -> Limit (cost=0.00..0.66 rows=1 width=8)"
> " -> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..3270923.14 rows=4930923
> width=8)"
> " -> Index Scan Backward using report_date_bank_id_key
> on arrear_import ai (cost=0.00..936.87 rows=444 width=8)"
> " Filter: (import_type_id = 1)"
> *" -> Index Scan using
> sygma_arrear_arrear_import_id_idx
> on sygma_arrear sa (cost=0.00..6971.15 rows=31495 width=4)"**
> **" Index Cond: (sa.arrear_import_id = ai.id
> <http://ai.id>)"**
> **" Filter: (sa.arrear_flag_id = 2)"**
> *
> Engine uses index - great.
>
> On 9.2
>
> "Index Scan using sygma_arrear_credit_id on sygma_arrear sar
> (cost=11.05..381.12 rows=1 width=265)"
> " Index Cond: (credit_id = 3102309 <tel:3102309>)"
> " Filter: ((arrear_import_id = $0) AND (arrear_flag_id = 2))"
> " InitPlan 1 (returns $0)"
> " -> Limit (cost=0.00..11.05 rows=1 width=8)"
> " -> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..54731485.84 rows=4953899
> width=8)"
> " Join Filter: (sa.arrear_import_id = ai.id
> <http://ai.id>)";
> " -> Index Scan Backward using report_date_bank_id_key
> on arrear_import ai (cost=0.00..62.81 rows=469 width=8)"
> " Filter: (import_type_id = 1)"
> *" -> Materialize (cost=0.00..447641.42 rows=6126357
> width=4)"**
> **" -> Seq Scan on sygma_arrear sa
> (cost=0.00..393077.64 rows=6126357 width=4)"**
> **" Filter: (arrear_flag_id = 2)"**
> *
> Seq scan... slooow.
>
> Why that's happens? All configurations are identical. Only engine is
> different.
>
>
>
> How did you do the upgrade?
pg_upgrade and I think that this is source of problem.
I have test database from dump/restore process and works properly.
> Have you tried to run a VACUUM ANALYZE on sygma_arrear?
Yes I did - after upgrade all databases was vacuumed.
vacuumdb -azv
I'll try reindex all indexes at weekend
--
Andrzej Zawadzki
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
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: zawadaa@wp.pl, matioli.matheus@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Slow query after upgrade from 9.0 to 9.2
In-Reply-To: <50EFCBE5.1080506@wp.pl>
* 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