Re: [GENERAL] Weird performance difference
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] Weird performance difference |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13423.1508546313@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] Weird performance difference (Israel Brewster <israel@ravnalaska.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] Weird performance difference
Re: [GENERAL] Weird performance difference |
Список | pgsql-general |
Israel Brewster <israel@ravnalaska.net> writes: >> Can you send "explain" (not explain analyze) for the production server? > Not for the full query - it only just completed, after 70 minutes or so, and I wasn't running under EXPLAIN ANALYZE. Runningwith a shorter date range of only 7 days, as you suggest below: https://explain.depesz.com/s/r80j <https://explain.depesz.com/s/r80j> First thing that jumps out from that is > Foreign Scan on oag_schedules (cost=100.00..128.60 rows=620 width=108) (actual time=3.576..477.524 rows=79,853 loops=1) Being off by a factor of 100 at the scan level is never a good start for a join plan. Turn on use_remote_estimate (assuming these are postgres_fdw tables). Also try explicitly ANALYZE'ing the foreign tables. I do not believe auto-analyze will touch foreign tables ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: