Re: [PERFORM] 9.6 query slower than 9.5.3

2016-06-17 Thread Tom Lane
Adam Brusselback writes: > I finally managed to get it compiled, patched, and working. It gave the > same plan with the same estimates as when I turned fkey_estimates off. OK, well, at least it's not making things worse ;-). But I think that this estimation method isn't very helpful for antijoi

[PERFORM] Savepoint and Releasepoint in Logs

2016-06-17 Thread e.ratnakar.shetty
Hi , I am connecting to PostgreSQL 9.4 via an ODBC driver on Windows machine from MS VBA application. I am facing huge performance issues while inserting data continuously. On analysing the logs , there were around 9 statements related to Save Points and Release Points. duration: 2.000 ms

Re: [PERFORM] 9.6 query slower than 9.5.3

2016-06-17 Thread Adam Brusselback
I finally managed to get it compiled, patched, and working. It gave the same plan with the same estimates as when I turned fkey_estimates off. I was wondering if I did things properly though, as i don't see the enable_fkey_estimates GUC any more. Was it removed?

Re: [PERFORM] Indexes for hashes

2016-06-17 Thread julyanto SUTANDANG
Crc32 is great because it is supported by Intel Hardware, unfortunatelly you have to code something like this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31184201/how-to-implement-crc32-taking-advantage-of-intel-specific-instructions int32_t sse42_crc32(const uint8_t *bytes, size_t len){ uint32_t hash

Re: [PERFORM] Indexes for hashes

2016-06-17 Thread Ivan Voras
And in any case, there's no crc32 in the built-in pgcrypto module. On 17 June 2016 at 06:18, Claudio Freire wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 1:09 AM, julyanto SUTANDANG > wrote: > > This way is doing faster using crc32(data) than hashtext since crc32 is > > hardware accelerated in intel (and o