Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eDxUf-0000dK-K6 for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 19:00:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eDxUf-0000me-6Q for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 19:00:33 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eD71Q-0006wn-2B for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 10 Nov 2017 10:58:52 +0000 Received: from mail-wr0-x236.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c0c::236]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eD71J-0003XX-Dm for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 10 Nov 2017 10:58:51 +0000 Received: by mail-wr0-x236.google.com with SMTP id k61so8244767wrc.4 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:58:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=EciPxIXYjld9cHGjWxgK84Jc8y4P9md6HqEpP2zh9+U=; b=IJybaKz6PEnw0RyqPiSpW/wZUGqW94OwcSnjAgTHQfyFuvQTGpPTgnQ/9kJEL79Tvy 1BpSf1QW6Z16606PuDrQ9s5waMOtJOskFOh2TUqMMyp1Rm1aD4gegGhKXn1cIRTqP3Qd H2WxYnSI8D/hgmjrKjLYDqFA/4tPD2hHsoglltdpYhq89XnCemNJyAGNUWKeiLFp8iT1 AG+uUtjvBdWlhJpNswryK/ASVb/mI4C82wYM5aIslL9SNlm6GiG1lz7koSRmxQ75Dbew 6z70smvgX3IcsazbnJuexGPOdHr1FJJrFwJU6X10igN5tvlctYEU6bzcOJzumJOqtf8h Uh7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=EciPxIXYjld9cHGjWxgK84Jc8y4P9md6HqEpP2zh9+U=; b=BwkgsTrMFn5f+QeGDW/XPoZj2Ccimf3EUJRwWlxQc3rgGfAr0iAEzcLS79AX3pz30K m4wnV6fciZ5MupJ6Bma17dO/fbiGmRUaDdOzp5MMeb6qHUSqQIl/a6GEG6CCynHyoZWI heR2C+2WQ5Z20fiCjU7Hv6EzZ7uyNf0NCgLplp4Br66wwcsjcfwqGEKyR8AeJfWPNhOT pbXXlPutfBLd47BCLVtOLzkOViV/dckbgHsqyCHzBXD+3X6JCFATTJ7PLBlpw1qpcfAQ p3KxPPiUQ3TEoXoW8GCF9Dqo/+3/n/mae6ODMNWIYi00KWAloEXnvozx4aQ5Oxcss1ai EN2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4m+W7h1ZU6Du/WkXaMQcQxMQU5pim7/JLqdIf30yw2b7G7Rec5 C57jy8HVggo8JlquEGWZ+GzzTnAhQ4PKh1E6N9U= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+RKxVmXZQWf6w8zG0kezkpf5CFdnNT14391Pnx3gUCC9kZLxOAnQG7VftomqMhVS4QQCvGFiJ3xM4FZK/klmdg= X-Received: by 10.223.128.4 with SMTP id 4mr3320102wrk.9.1510311522596; Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:58:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.51.21 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:58:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.28.51.21 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:58:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: p kirti Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 16:28:41 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: DB slowness after upgrade from Postgres 9.1 to 9.4 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0832dccdfee8055d9ecde1" List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-performance Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org --94eb2c0832dccdfee8055d9ecde1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi all, We have recently upgraded our project with a huge DB from Postgres v9.1 to v9.4. The whole system performance has degraded alarmingly after the upgrade. Simple operations that were taking only a few seconds in Postgres 9.1 are now taking minutes of time. The problem is not specific to one query orany particular kind of query. Its been generic and overall system has become very slow. We tried running 'VACUUM ANALYZE' on the DB and that seemed to be helpful too. But the improvement after this is nowhere close to the performance we had in 9.1. We tried changing some of the performance parameters in the postgres.confirm as follows (our Postgres server has an 8GB RAM) - shared_buffers = 200MB maintenance_work_mem = 1000MB default_statistics_target = 1000 effective_cache_size = 4000MB And these made absolutely no difference to the query execution time. The strangest part of the problem is when I EXPLAIN ANALYZE the same query multiple times in the same Postgres server, it gives me different execution times every time ranging from 45 ms to 181 ms. We are absolutely clueless on how to proceed. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. --94eb2c0832dccdfee8055d9ecde1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,

We h= ave recently upgraded our project with a huge DB from Postgres v9.1 to v9.4= . The whole system performance has degraded alarmingly after the upgrade. S= imple operations that were taking only a few seconds in Postgres 9.1 are no= w taking minutes of time.

The problem is not specific to one query orany particular kind of query. = Its been generic and overall system has become very slow.

We tried running 'VACUUM ANALYZE'= on the DB and that seemed to be helpful too. But the improvement after thi= s is nowhere close to the performance we had in 9.1.

We tried changing some of the performance para= meters in the postgres.confirm as follows (our Postgres server has an 8GB R= AM) -

shared_buffers =3D= 200MB
maintenance_work_mem =3D 1000MB
default_statistics_target =3D 1000
effecti= ve_cache_size =3D 4000MB
And these made absolutely n= o difference to the query execution time.

=
The strangest part of the problem is when I EXPLAIN ANALY= ZE the same query multiple times in the same Postgres server, it gives me d= ifferent execution times every time ranging from 45 ms to 181 ms.

We are absolutely clueless on how= to proceed. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
= Thanks in advance.
--94eb2c0832dccdfee8055d9ecde1--