Re: Query became very slow after 9.6 -> 10 upgrade

> The line number offsets are expected when applying to v10, but it looks > like you failed to transfer the attachment cleanly ... Yes, it was some mistake on our side. It looks that patch helps us. Tom, thank you! I'm still testing it though, just in case. What are PostgreSQL schedule on

Re: Query became very slow after 9.6 -> 10 upgrade

Dmitry Shalashov writes: > It looks that patch helps us. Tom, thank you! > I'm still testing it though, just in case. Excellent, please follow up if you learn anything new. > What are PostgreSQL schedule on releasing fixes like this? Can I expect > that it will be in 10.2 and

Re: insert and query performance on big string table with pg_trgm

On Nov 21, 2017 00:05, "Matthew Hall" wrote: > Are all indexes present at the time you insert? It will probably be much faster to insert without the gin index (at least) and build it after the load. There is some flexibility on the initial load, but the updates in the