Re: [GENERAL] Analyzing performance regression from 9.2 to 9.6

> Am I right in guessing that report_submission.id is a > declared-not-null column, so that the join FROM "report_skilltype" > should be understood as an anti-join? You are exactly right. > Any chance of whacking your ORM upside the head to the point where it would emit that? In this case it

Re: [GENERAL] Analyzing performance regression from 9.2 to 9.6

Dave Peticolas writes: > Hi, I am trying to analyze a performance regression from 9.2.21 to 9.6.3. > The query and execution plans are below with 9.6.3 first. Hm. Neither version is exactly covering itself with glory. I'm not sure why 9.6 doesn't pick the same plan as 9.2, but

[GENERAL] Analyzing performance regression from 9.2 to 9.6

Hi, I am trying to analyze a performance regression from 9.2.21 to 9.6.3. The query and execution plans are below with 9.6.3 first. If the query looks a bit odd, it was generated by an ORM and the names have been modified. The slight difference in row counts is because they are from snapshots