> On Fri, June 3, 2011 13:57, t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
>> There's something very wrong with snames - the planner expects 22 rows
>> but
>> gets 164147851. Which probably causes a bad plan choice or something
>> like that.
>> Try to analyze the snames table (and maybe increase the statistics
>> target o
On Fri, June 3, 2011 13:57, t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
> There's something very wrong with snames - the planner expects 22 rows but
> gets 164147851. Which probably causes a bad plan choice or something like
> that.
> Try to analyze the snames table (and maybe increase the statistics
> target on the col
On Fri, June 3, 2011 13:57, t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
> See this http://explain.depesz.com/s/THh
>
>
> There's something very wrong with snames - the planner expects 22 rows but
> gets 164147851. Which probably causes a bad plan choice or something like
> that.
> Try to analyze the snames table (and ma
> Greets,
>
> I'm trying to figure out why the following SELECT has become slow
> (hardware,
> code changes, etc) and would appreciate any comments on interpreting the
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE output. It *used* to take a few seconds at most, but not
> anymore... In figuring out which part is taking so l
Greets,
I'm trying to figure out why the following SELECT has become slow (hardware,
code changes, etc) and would appreciate any comments on interpreting the
EXPLAIN ANALYZE output. It *used* to take a few seconds at most, but not
anymore... In figuring out which part is taking so long, what's t
