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 6549FD8FE2 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:13:47 -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 95216-03 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:13:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pjetlic.mobart.hr (pjetlic.mobart.hr [80.80.51.10]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A043DD8B42 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:13:45 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pjetlic.mobart.hr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52B0C17A41 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:13:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pjetlic.mobart.hr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pjetlic [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 20887-03-3 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:13:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mike.mobart.hr (mike.mobart.hr [192.168.10.94]) (using SSLv3 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pjetlic.mobart.hr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AC7B17A3E for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:13:46 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Postgres 7.4.9 slow! From: Mario Splivalo Reply-To: mario.splivalo@mobart.hr To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Mob-Art Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:13:46 +0200 Message-Id: <1129893226.25351.3.camel@ekim> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by OpenSource AV+AS Mail Server X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.007 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.007] X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200510/238 X-Sequence-Number: 23091 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."