Re: Query Performance after pg_restore

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Ron Johnson
Тема Re: Query Performance after pg_restore
Дата
Msg-id CANzqJaC0_PiiQXdWy2SuqhjcJdGHvT83SF_jo5XS3O5jVh06MA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на RE: Query Performance after pg_restore  (Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>)
Список pgsql-admin
I'd run EXPLAIN <query> on each server.

On Sun, Dec 24, 2023 at 12:00 PM Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> wrote:
Thanks, Tom.

I am wondering if there is way to obtain same performance as before. Like restoring performance statistics?!
Simple analyze is not helping. And Vacuum is a overkill where there are no dead tuples.

I am not setting any hint bits... I can verify this in new and old if you can provide a query or some method to verify this... I still have original copy of same database on a different server for comparison.



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2023 10:12 AM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Query Performance after pg_restore

Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:
> I did pg_dump of a ~20TB database followed by pg_restore. I find simple queries like select count(*) running slow. I did a select count(*) on all tables before pg_dump which took ~4 hours. After pg_restore, same thing took 32 hours.

My bet is that that was setting commit hint bits, and hence incurring a lot of writes.  If the data is reasonably stable that's a one-time expense.

                        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Murthy Nunna
Дата:
Сообщение: RE: Query Performance after pg_restore
Следующее
От: Laurenz Albe
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Query Performance after pg_restore