[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pgsql-performance
Subject:    Re: [PERFORM] Performance difference between Slon master and slave
From:       Mattthew Lunnon <mlunnon () rwa-net ! co ! uk>
Date:       2015-12-14 21:43:44
Message-ID: 0393B1AA-B274-4293-825B-B42D36EF7806 () rwa-net ! co ! uk
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Jim,
Thanks for your response. Yes the tables have been analysed and I have also \
re-indexed and vacuumed the slave database.  Regards
Matthew 

Sent from my iPad

> On 14 Dec 2015, at 17:49, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 12/14/15 11:16 AM, Matthew Lunnon wrote:
> > Inspecting the execution plan shows that there are some differences, for
> > example, the slave is using a HashAggregate when the master is simply
> > grouping. There also seems to be a difference with the ordering of the
> > sub plans.
> 
> Have you tried analyzing the tables on the slave?
> 
> Also, keep in mind that the first time you access rows on a Slony slave after \
> they're replicated Postgres will need to write hint bits out, which will take some \
>                 time. But that's clearly not the issue here.
> -- 
> Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
> Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
> Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com


This message has been scanned for malware by Websense. www.websense.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]