Henry Drexler wrote: > why would the query time go from 4 minutes to over 50, for an > increase in table rows from 30 million to 65 million? Did the active (frequently referenced) portion of the database go from something which fit in cache to something which didn't? Did any hash table or sort nodes in plans go from fitting in work_mem to spilling to disk? Did any indexes need an extra level in the tree? Did any plans change based on size to something which is less than optimal, suggesting a need to tune the cost factors? -Kevin -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
