On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Steven Grimm wrote:
> (first five iterations)
>
> Index Only Scan using test_pkey on test (cost=0.29..476.29 rows=
> width=4) (actual time=0.058..2.439 rows=1 loops=1)
> Index Cond: (col1 = 'xyz'::text)
> Filter: (col2 ~~
2017-06-11 18:34 GMT+02:00 Steven Grimm :
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I've been watching this thread and trying to figure out how to
>> explain that part; I suspected a cause of this form but couldn't
>> make that
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, I've been watching this thread and trying to figure out how to
> explain that part; I suspected a cause of this form but couldn't
> make that theory match the 9-iterations observation. (I still can't.)
>
I walked
I wrote:
> Right. The plancache code is designed to switch to a generic plan if
> that doesn't seem to save anything compared to a custom plan that's
> built for the specific parameter value(s).
Er, -ENOCAFFEINE. That's backwards of course. I think the rest of
what I wrote is okay.
Steven Grimm writes:
> That seems to fit the behavior. Thanks; I wasn't aware of that feature of
> prepared statements. I changed the Python code to do EXPLAIN ANALYZE
> EXECUTE rather than EXECUTE, and I do indeed see a change in plan after the
> fifth iteration:
> (first
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:10 PM, David G. Johnston <
david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-prepare.html
>
> Specifically, the notes section.
That seems to fit the behavior. Thanks; I wasn't aware of that feature of
prepared statements. I
On Saturday, June 10, 2017, Steven Grimm wrote:
> The problem doesn't appear to be specific to the JDBC driver. Tried a
> quick version of this in Python for grins with a database that was already
> populated by the Java code (sadly, the psycopg2 library doesn't directly
>
The problem doesn't appear to be specific to the JDBC driver. Tried a quick
version of this in Python for grins with a database that was already
populated by the Java code (sadly, the psycopg2 library doesn't directly
support prepared statements):
import psycopg2
import time
conn =
Hi
On Sat, 2017-06-10 at 09:17 -0700, Steven Grimm wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 1:46 AM, Alban Hertroys
> wrote:
> > I notice that you're declaring your ResultSet variable inside the
> loop, which means that you create and destroy it frequently. I've
> been told that this
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 1:46 AM, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> I notice that you're declaring your ResultSet variable inside the loop,
which means that you create and destroy it frequently. I've been told that
this is a pattern that the GC has trouble keeping up with (although that
> On 10 Jun 2017, at 5:37, Steven Grimm wrote:
[…]
I notice that you're declaring your ResultSet variable inside the loop, which
means that you create and destroy it frequently. I've been told that this is a
pattern that the GC has trouble keeping up with (although
PostgreSQL 9.6.3 on OS X Sierra, JDBC driver version 42.1.1.
I noticed that one of my queries was slowing down after a few invocations.
Narrowed it down to an issue with bind variables and LIKE conditions. Very
consistently, on a given connection, the first 9 times a SELECT containing
a LIKE
12 matches
Mail list logo