"Andrus" <kobruleht2@xxxxxx> writes: >> Just out of curiosity, what "earlier version" was that that was able to >> run this query quickly? > It was installed in customer site at May 2012 in Windows 2003 server and > latest RTM version of Postgres > x32 in this time was used. That would probably have been 9.1.something, which makes it even less likely that there was a significant planner difference affecting this. I wonder if maybe the 9.1 installation had a higher work_mem, or there was some other configuration setting you forgot to bring forward. (A higher work_mem might have allowed it to use hashed rather than simple subplans, which could possibly explain the speed difference.) > Will your suggestion run faster ? Is it reasonable to switch to use your > suggestion ? If you're happy with performance now, there's probably no reason to mess with it. Changing the query might allow you to skip building those indexes though, so if that's a pain point then it might be worth spending more time on. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
