Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eMG45-0004sM-OR for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 05 Dec 2017 16:27:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eMG44-0002UI-Tv for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 05 Dec 2017 16:27:24 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eMG44-0002U8-NS for pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 05 Dec 2017 16:27:24 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eMG3x-0004iZ-Ca for pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 05 Dec 2017 16:27:23 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id vB5GREkR007974; Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:27:14 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas cc: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Extremely slow DELETE with cascade foreign keys In-reply-to: <8f569ed9-fde9-1fe7-4beb-01945009e040@gmail.com> References: <8f569ed9-fde9-1fe7-4beb-01945009e040@gmail.com> Comments: In-reply-to Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas message dated "Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:21:38 -0200" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <7972.1512491234.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2017 11:27:14 -0500 Message-ID: <7973.1512491234@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas writes: > Hi, I think something changed recently in my development environment as > I don't recall deletes being so slow before. > I've created a new dump and restored to a new database, ran VACUUM FULL > ANALYSE and a simple delete takes forever as you can see here: The usual suspect for this is not having an index on some FK referencing column, thus forcing the FK check trigger to seq-scan the entire referencing table for each referenced row that is to be deleted. regards, tom lane