|
Trying again since I couldn't post without being subscribed. The
message got stalled and was never sent, so I just subscribed and I'm
trying again. Original message I tried to send two days ago: ---------------------------------- I've explained a bit of how my application works in this thread as well as the reasons why I couldn't use PG 9.2.1 due to performance issues and had to rollback to 9.1. http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Query-completed-in-lt-1s-in-PG-9-1-and-700s-in-PG-9-2-td5730899.html Now I found that 9.2.2 was released while 9.1 is performing worse for the same db schema, but the data is now different. So, here are the output of some explain analyze: Old DB dump, PG 9.1: http://explain.depesz.com/s/mvf (0.2s) New DB dump, PG 9.1: http://explain.depesz.com/s/vT2k (4.3s) New DB dump, PG 9.2.2: http://explain.depesz.com/s/uu0 (0.04s) I've already upgraded back to PG 9.2.2 but I thought you might be interested on backporting that improvement to 9.1 as well and I'm not even sure if the bug above was fixed intentionally or by chance so I'd like to be sure about that... The query I used was: SELECT t.id as tid, t.acquiror_company_name || ' / ' || t.target_company_name as tname, exists(select id from condition_document_excerpt where condition_id=c1726.id) as v1726_has_reference, l1726.value as v1726 FROM company_transaction t left outer join condition_option_value v1726 inner join transaction_condition c1726 on c1726.id=v1726.condition_id and type_id=1726 inner join condition_option_label l1726 on l1726.id=v1726.value_id on c1726.transaction_id = t.id WHERE t.edit_status = 'Finished' and (t.id in (select transaction_id from condition_option_value v1726 inner join transaction_condition c1726 on c1726.id=v1726.condition_id and type_id=1726 inner join condition_option_label l1726 on l1726.id=v1726.value_id AND (v1726.value_id = 278) ) ) ORDER BY t.acquiror_company_name, t.target_company_name If I simplify the WHERE condition it performs much better in 9.1 for this particular case (but I can't do that as the queries are generated dynamically, please see first mentioned link to understand the reason): WHERE t.edit_status = 'Finished' and v1726.value_id = 278 New DB dump, 9.1, simplified query: http://explain.depesz.com/s/oj1 (0.03s) The inner query (for the "in" clause) alone takes 44ms: select transaction_id from condition_option_value v1726 inner join transaction_condition c1726 on c1726.id=v1726.condition_id and type_id=1726 inner join condition_option_label l1726 on l1726.id=v1726.value_id AND (v1726.value_id = 278) So, what would be the reason for the full original query to take over 4s in PG 9.1? Best, Rodrigo. |
