Andrus wrote: > Richard, > >>> Results are provided in bottom of the message to which you replied. >> >> No - the explains there were contrasting a date test BETWEEN versus =. > > I changed rid.toode statitics target to 100: > > ALTER TABLE firma2.rid ALTER COLUMN toode SET STATISTICS 100; > analyze firma2.rid; > > Analyze takes 3 seconds and testcase rans fast. > I'm planning to monitor results by looking log file for queries which > take longer than 10 seconds. Sensible. I don't know if 10 seconds is the right value for your database, but there will be a point that filters out most of your traffic but still gives enough to find problems. > Do you still need results ? > If yes, which query and how many times should I run? If changing the statistics seems to help, you're not going to want to go back just to repeat tests. >> Ah, I think I understand. The test case was *missing* this clause. > > I added this clause to testcase. Also added char(70) colums containing > padding characters to all three tables. Cannot still reproduce this issue > in testcase in fast devel 8.3 notebook. > In testcase order_products contains product_id values in a very regular > order, maybe this affects the results. No idea how to use random() to > generate random > products for every order. Ideally you don't even want random products. You want a distribution of products that matches the same "shape" as you have in your production database. -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
