On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 01:18:00PM +0000, Adam Torres wrote: > Good morning all, > > We have a problem with performance after upgrading from 9.3 to 9.6 where > certain queries take 9 times longer to run. On our initial attempt to > upgrade, we noticed the system as a whole was taking longer to run through > normal daily processes. The query with the largest run time was picked to > act as a measuring stick.
> https://explain.depesz.com/s/z71u > Planning time: 8.218 ms > Execution time: 639319.525 ms > > Same query as run on 9.3 > https://explain.depesz.com/s/gjN3 > Total runtime: 272897.150 ms Actually it looks to me like both query plans are poor.. ..because of this: | Hash Join (cost=85,086.25..170,080.80 ROWS=40 width=115) (actual time=32.673..84.427 ROWS=13,390 loops=1) | Hash Cond: (av.customer_id = cc_1.id) If there are a large number of distinct customer_ids (maybe with nearly equal frequencies), it might help to ALTER TABLE av ALTER customer_id SET STATISTICS 400 ..same for cc_1.id. And re-analyze those tables (are they large??). see if statistics improve: SELECT (SELECT sum(x) FROM unnest(most_common_freqs) x) frac_MCV, tablename, attname, n_distinct, array_length(most_common_vals,1) n_mcv, FROM pg_stats WHERE attname~'customers_customer' AND tablename='id' GROUP BY 1,2,3,4,5 ORDER BY 1 Goal is to get at least an accurate value for n_distinct (but preferably also storing the most frequent IDs). I wouldn't bother re-running the query unless you find that increasing stats target causes the plan to change. Justin -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance