Hi Justin,
Thanks a lot for the detailed analysis and explanation for slowness that
was seen. Pointed noted related to the vacuum tuning option.
Regards, Amarendra
On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 4:36 AM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 04:38:50PM +0530, Amarendra Konda wrote:
> > As pa
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 04:38:50PM +0530, Amarendra Konda wrote:
> As part of one query tuning, it was observed that query execution time was
> more even though cost was decreased.
..
> May i know the reason behind in increase in response time, even though cost
> was reduced by 6.4 times.
The "c
Hi,
As part of one query tuning, it was observed that query execution time was
more even though cost was decreased.
*Initial Query :* Nested Loop Left Join (cost=159.88..*38530.02* rows=1
width=8) (actual time=0.387..*40.766* rows=300 loops=1)
*Changed Query :* Nested Loop Anti Join (cost=171
