On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Eric Lemoine <eric.lemoine@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/08/2017 10:41 PM, Éric wrote:
>
>
>
>> Have you experimented with other queries that don't involve PostGIS?
>> I'm wondering if your hook-installation code fails to work properly
>> unless PostGIS was loaded first. This would be easier to credit if
>> there are hooks both extensions try to get into.
>
>
> I think you're right on Tom. It looks like I cannot reproduce the issue if I start by calling a PostGIS function rather than a Pointcloud function. So it may well be a conflict between PostGIS and Pointcloud. Both use fn_extra, and that makes we wonder. This old thread [*] makes me wonder too! I still need to figure out the bug, but I can see some light now! thanks
>
> [*] <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/ >984D0F47C5FF4D0DB0D71A4F6EF670 ED%40cleverelephant.ca# 984D0F47C5FF4D0DB0D71A4F6EF670 ED@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I now think that the performance bug is not related to the fn_extra
thing. I had hope but not anymore :) I don't see where the Pointcloud
and PostGIS extensions could conflict.
Can you run 'perf top' on the slow query? That might pretty quickly tell you which function is taking up your time.
Cheers,
Jeff
