X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1DB4D7D4D for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 09:01:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 49852-03 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:01:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from viefep18-int.chello.at (viefep18-int.chello.at [213.46.255.21]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F2CFD6E78 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 09:01:30 -0300 (ADT) Received: from OTTO ([213.222.172.216]) by viefep18-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.6.01.04.04 201-2131-118-104-20050224) with SMTP id <20051021120132.FWWP17343.viefep18-int.chello.at@OTTO> for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:01:32 +0200 Message-ID: <006701c5d637$2d7b5550$6400a8c0@OTTO> From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Havasv=F6lgyi_Ott=F3?= To: References: <1129893226.25351.3.camel@ekim> Subject: Re: Postgres 7.4.9 slow! Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:01:32 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-2"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.08 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.080] X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200510/239 X-Sequence-Number: 23092 Mike, Please send the EXPLAIN ANALYZE of the two versions of the query. Best Regards, Otto ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mario Splivalo" To: Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 1:13 PM Subject: [SQL] Postgres 7.4.9 slow! > Hello! I'm not sure if this belongs to this mailing list, if not, please > tell me to redirect to where it belongs. > > I have a query that does COUNT, LEFT JOIN and GROUP BY from two tables. > One has 85000 records, and other has 1000000 records. I've been running > the tests on 7.4.3, with SET ENABLE_SEQSCAN TO OFF, and I get 9-11 > seconds for that query. Query plan shows that postgres is using both > indexes on both tables (one index is set on primary key, naturaly, and > other is manualy set on foreign key in 'child' table). That is > acceptable. > > But, now I downloaded postgres 7.4.9, and i'm running the very same > query on the very same database with all the indices and constraints > beeing the same (also SET ENABLE_SEQSCAN TO OFF), and I get around > 90-110 seconds. > > Has anyone noticed extreeme slowdown of postgres 7.4.9? > > Mike > -- > Mario Splivalo > Mob-Art > mario.splivalo@mobart.hr > > "I can do it quick, I can do it cheap, I can do it well. Pick any two." > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq > >