Re: query reboot pgsql 9.5.1

[Felipe de Jesús Molina Bravo <fjmolinabravo@xxxxxxxxx>]

the output is:

pba=# EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, TIMING, BUFFERS) SELECT idprodxintegrar FROM _gc_tb a LEFT  join _gc_cat b on ( b.arama <@ a.arama  and a.arama <@ b.arama )
;
                                               QUERY PLAN                                               
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Nested Loop Left Join  (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=0.003..0.003 rows=0 loops=1)
   Join Filter: ((b.arama <@ a.arama) AND (a.arama <@ b.arama))
   ->  Seq Scan on _gc_tb a  (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=1 width=66) (actual time=0.002..0.002 rows=0 loops=1)
   ->  Seq Scan on _gc_cat b  (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=1 width=70) (never executed)
 Planning time: 0.206 ms
 Execution time: 0.074 ms
(6 filas)

2016-03-04 15:01 GMT-06:00 David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@xxxxxxxxx>:

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Felipe de Jesús Molina Bravo <fjmolinabravo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Now i execute the same in pgsql 9.4.5 and all is fine!!!

The EXPLAINs are:

- pgsql 9.5.1:

   Nested Loop Left Join  (cost=0.03..492944.81 rows=276095 width=4)
     ->  Seq Scan on _gc_tb a  (cost=0.00..3321.30 rows=120130 width=66)
       ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on _gc_cat b  (cost=0.03..4.06 rows=2 width=70)
             Recheck Cond: ((arama <@ a.arama) AND (a.arama <@ arama))
                 ->  Bitmap Index Scan on _gc_cat_arama_gin
                 (cost=0.00..0.03 rows=2 width=0)
                                Index Cond: ((arama <@ a.arama) AND
                                (a.arama <@ arama))


- pgsql 9.4.5:
   Nested Loop Left Join  (cost=0.03..492944.81 rows=276095 width=4)
     ->  Seq Scan on _gc_tb a  (cost=0.00..3321.30 rows=120130 width=66)
        ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on _gc_cat b  (cost=0.03..4.06 rows=2 width=70)
               Recheck Cond: ((arama <@ a.arama) AND (a.arama <@ arama))
                        ->  Bitmap Index Scan on _gc_cat_arama_gin
                        (cost=0.00..0.03 rows=2 width=0)
                                       Index Cond: ((arama <@ a.arama) AND
                                       (a.arama <@ arama))

The above are exactly the same, so if they are indeed from the different versions I do not see an issue. The question to ask here is whether the above are actually from the different Postgres instances?

yes these are differents  

​It would be nice to see the output of "EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, TIMING, BUFFERS)" so real timings can be observed.

David J.

​