mcpbeat

Generating Clickhouse Query Performance Reports

posthog/generating-clickhouse-query-performance-reports

> Produce and structure slow-query performance reports for PostHog's production ClickHouse (US and EU). Use when asked for a slow query report, query performance analysis over the last N days, per-team query cost, OOM or timeout investigation, cluster cost/memory regressions, or materialization candidates. Covers the modern `query_log_archive` source (typed `lc_*` columns, multi-day retention), how to categorize and attribute slow queries, root-cause patterns (unmaterialized JSONExtract, high-cardinality breakdowns, heavy joins), and the report structure. Runs queries via the `query-clickhouse-via-metabase` skill.

12k tokens
context cost
the whole folder, loaded on every use
4
files
instructions only
0
copies elsewhere
how many repositories repackaged it
690
stars on the repo
on the repository, not the skill itself

Install

one command, takes just this skill from the repository
npx skills add https://github.com/PostHog/posthog --skill generating-clickhouse-query-performance-reports

What comes with it

28 507 bytes besides the instruction
references/hogql-deep-dive.md
references/materialization-analysis.md
references/query-patterns.md

What it tells the agent to use

found in the instruction text
Task spawns other agents

The instruction itself

9 sections, as written by the author

Generating ClickHouse query performance reports

This skill is the _methodology_ for investigating slow ClickHouse queries and writing up a

performance report. It pairs with query-clickhouse-via-metabase,

which is the _mechanism_ (SSO-gated auth and hogli metabase:query). Run every query in this skill

through that one.

Reports themselves are not public. When it exists, the private PostHog/query-performance-analysis repo

holds the historical reports and example query IDs; this repo holds only the tooling and methodology.

That repo is usually checked out as a sibling folder to the posthog checkout (e.g.

../query-performance-analysis relative to the repo root, or alongside it under the same parent

directory). Look for a sibling directory named query-performance-analysis containing an analysis/

folder of dated reports. If you find it, add the new report there as a new markdown file under

analysis/, named <YYYY-MM-DD>-<topic>.md (match the existing naming, e.g.

2026-05-27-slow-queries-14d.md).

The sibling repo may not exist, and that is fine. If you cannot find it, do not write into the public

posthog repo and do not block on it: write the report to a temp folder instead (e.g.

/tmp/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<topic>.md), tell the user where you put it, and skip the previous-report comparison

in step 9 (there is no history to diff against).

Data source: posthog.query_log_archive (not system.query_log)

system.query_log on the production clusters retains only a few hours, so it cannot answer a

multi-day question. Use the Distributed archive table instead:

FROM posthog.query_log_archive

It retains roughly three weeks and exposes log_comment as typed columns, so you skip JSONExtract.

Query it directly (it already fans out across the cluster). Always filter is_initial_query so

distributed sub-queries are not double-counted. Confirm current retention with a per-day

count() before trusting a window (see references/query-patterns.md).

Key columns (full list via system.columns WHERE table='query_log_archive'):

| Column | Meaning |

| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

| team_id (Int64) | Tenant. 0 / empty means internal or unattributed. |

| lc_kind | How the query was issued: request (sync API/web), celery (async refresh), temporal, cohort_calculation, dagster. |

| lc_product | product_analytics, warehouse, experiments, messaging, web_analytics, replay, llm_analytics, cohorts, ... |

| lc_access_method | personal_api_key, oauth, sharing_token, or empty (logged-in web). |

| lc_query__kind | Product query type: TrendsQuery, FunnelsQuery, RetentionQuery, HogQLQuery, ... |

| lc_workload | Workload.OFFLINE / ONLINE. |

| lc_feature, lc_temporal__workflow_type, lc_route_id, lc_api_key_label | Origin detail for attribution. |

| lc_dashboard_id, lc_insight_id, lc_experiment_id, lc_cohort_id | Link a query back to the object that triggered it. |

| query, query_duration_ms, read_bytes, read_rows, memory_usage, exception_code | The query and its cost. |

Both regions have the archive. US and EU are separate clusters with different workloads and

materialized columns; run cross-region comparisons against both. Discover the current ClickHouse

database id per region with hogli metabase:databases (ids are not stable). Note that the ONLINE and

OFFLINE Metabase connections for a region fan out to the same logical cluster, so they return the same

query_log_archive data.

What counts as a slow query

query_duration_ms > 30000 OR exception_code IN (159, 160, 241)

| Code | Meaning |

| ---- | --------------------- |

| 159 | TIMEOUT_EXCEEDED |

| 160 | TOO_SLOW |

| 241 | MEMORY_LIMIT_EXCEEDED |

Do not add type = 'QueryFinish': OOM and timeout rows are type = 'ExceptionWhileProcessing',

so that filter silently drops every failure. The duration/exception predicate already excludes

QueryStart rows (duration 0). Exclude the cluster health-poll query by normalized_query_hash

(pattern in references/query-patterns.md).

Producing the report

The standard workflow, building from coarse to specific. Each step's SQL is in

references/query-patterns.md.

Do not read previous reports until step 9. Steps 1-8 should run against the raw data with fresh eyes,

so the analysis captures the largest surface area rather than re-walking last report's findings. Reading

the prior report early anchors you to its categories and makes it easy to miss a new problem it never

mentioned. Diff against history only after the independent pass is done.

  • Confirm the window. Per-day count() over the intended range to verify the archive actually

covers it (retention can be shorter than you expect).

  • Headline summary. Total slow queries, total cluster query-hours, bytes read, teams touched,

and the split across succeeded-but-slow / timeouts / OOMs / other. Also capture the **cluster-wide

totals across all queries** (not just the slow set): total query-seconds, total CPU-seconds (typed

ProfileEvents_OSCPUVirtualTimeMicroseconds column, not the Map lookup), total bytes read, and

total OOMs (references/query-patterns.md §1b). The slow-set sums are a biased subset; the all-query

totals are the honest "busier / reading more this period?" denominator and the baseline future reports

diff against. They cannot be backfilled once a window ages past retention, so record them every run.

  • Date distribution. Slow count, timeouts, and OOMs per day. This is where incidents announce

themselves: a multi-day OOM or timeout surge against a flat baseline.

  • Categorize. Group by lc_kind × lc_product × lc_access_method. This separates background

work (data modeling, dagster pre-aggregation, batch exports) from synchronous user-facing queries.

  • Attribute. Drill into the worst categories by team_id. Rank by total cluster-hours

(sum(query_duration_ms)) and by OOM count separately. Before calling anything systemic,

check whether one team or one API key dominates a metric: a single integration querying via a

personal_api_key can account for the large majority of cluster OOMs, and the "incident" is then

really one tenant. Attribute by team_id + lc_api_key_label first. Then add a **top-consumers view

over all queries** (not just the slow set): top teams, top API keys (lc_api_key_label), and top tools

(lc_product) ranked by bytes, CPU-seconds, and wall-time (references/query-patterns.md §4c).

This is where the heavy-but-fast consumers show up: a tenant or integration can dominate cluster CPU

or bytes through millions of cheap queries while never crossing the slow threshold, so it is invisible

to the slow-set ranking. The CPU:wall ratio per row separates compute-bound from wait/IO-bound load.

  • Characterize user-facing slowness. For lc_kind='request' AND lc_product='product_analytics'

with empty lc_access_method (logged-in web), break down by lc_query__kind and flag

breakdown_value usage and JSONExtract over person_properties. This is the product-actionable

bucket. Always include the JSON-extracted property breakdown (references/query-patterns.md §7):

the top event vs person property names pulled from JSON blobs in the slow set, and which teams use

each. These are the materialization candidates and a required report output. HogQLQuery (arbitrary

user- and AI-authored SQL) deserves its own deep dive, including how much is AI-written and why it is

slow; see references/hogql-deep-dive.md.

  • Root-cause the worst offenders. For the top findings, do not stop at "team X is slow": pull the

full query and form a hypothesis for _why_, then test it with EXPLAIN. Root-causing an individual

query is the optimizing-clickhouse-and-hogql-queries

skill's job; its references/investigation-playbook.md

is the playbook (pull the full query, bytes vs CPU vs duration, the runtime causes, origin tracing,

EXPLAIN). A useful finding includes a why ("scans full history because the time filter is

function-wrapped and can't prune granules"), even if stated as a hypothesis.

  • Examples + write-up. Capture query_id + event_date for the worst offenders in each finding,

then write the report (structure below). Because system.query_log retention is short, examples are

resolved from query_log_archive (WHERE query_id = '…' AND event_date = '…'), not the old Metabase

lookup card. Link each example to a shareable self-contained Metabase URL (the query_link recipe in

references/query-patterns.md) so a reader clicks straight through to the query. When you draft the

recommendations, ground the researchable ones in code by spawning background research agents (see

"Grounding recommendations in code" below) so a recommendation points at the actual file and change

rather than saying "audit X".

  • Diff against the previous report (do this last, if there is one). If the sibling

query-performance-analysis repo is not present, skip this step entirely. Otherwise, only now, after

the independent pass above, read the most recent dated report in its analysis/ folder

(sort by filename date). Add a short delta section to the new report covering: what moved since

last time (new incidents, findings that grew or resolved, headline numbers up or down), and a

follow-up check on anything the previous report flagged as needing action (a materialization that

was recommended, a team to watch, a pipeline to make incremental). For each prior follow-up, state

whether it is resolved, still open, or regressed, with the current numbers as evidence. Doing this

last is deliberate: it keeps the fresh analysis unbiased while still closing the loop on history.

Make the windows comparable before quoting a delta: confirm the previous report used the same

window length (both reports here use a trailing now() - INTERVAL N DAY, so equal length but with

overlapping and partial edge days). Headline totals between two trailing windows are usually dominated

by whichever one-off incident sits inside one window and not the other, so a large drop is rarely a

structural improvement. Always also compare an incident-excluded baseline (e.g. OOMs/day with the

spike days removed) so the delta is not misread, and say explicitly when a total moved because an

incident aged into or out of the window. Remember the summed metrics (bytes read, cluster-hours) cover

the slow set only, not total cluster I/O, so they also move when a heavy background job's runs

cross or stop crossing the 30s threshold; attribute a big bytes/hours swing to specific categories

(it is usually one or two background pipelines) rather than reporting it as a cluster-wide change.

Grounding recommendations in code

A recommendation like "audit pipeline X" or "materialize property Y" is far more useful when it points at

the actual code. For each recommendation that maps to a concrete place in the PostHog codebase, **spawn a

background research agent** (the Agent tool, run_in_background: true, subagent_type: general-purpose

or Explore) to read the source and return: how the relevant code works today, the specific file /

function to change, any constraints, and whether a better mechanism already exists. Spawn **one agent per

researchable recommendation**, all in a single message so they run in parallel, as soon as the

recommendations are drafted. Let them run while you do the delta (step 9) and finalize the write-up, then

fold each finding into its recommendation: replace "audit X" with "X is implemented in <file> as

<current behavior>; the change is <specific>", and cite the file paths so the human can jump straight

in. The agents research and report only; they do not change code.

Not every recommendation is researchable this way. Spawn an agent only where source code is the source of

truth; skip operational / infra items:

| Recommendation shape | Researchable? | What the agent reads |

| ---------------------------------------- | ------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |

| Rewrite a slow insight / query shape | yes | the query runner under posthog/hogql_queries/, the HogQL it emits |

| Materialize property X | yes | the materialized-column registry (ee/clickhouse/materialized_columns/) |

| Make pipeline Y incremental | yes | the dagster / temporal job that builds it |

| Cap memory / add a query guard per key | yes | where ClickHouse SETTINGS and per-key throttling are applied |

| Add a breakdown cardinality guard | yes | the trends / breakdown query runner |

| Investigate an infra incident window | no | n/a (deploys, node health, cluster state) |

| Watch / confirm a tenant's intended load | no | n/a (a judgement call for a human) |

Give each agent a focused prompt: the recommendation, the specific question, and an instruction to return

file paths + current behavior + the precise change point and to change nothing. The agents read the

posthog repo (where this skill lives); the report itself is written to the separate

query-performance-analysis repo.

Interpreting the results

  • Two populations live in "slow queries." Tight-timeout API noise (queries erroring at ~10s

against a low max_execution_time, usually personal_api_key) inflates the raw count without

representing real compute. Genuinely expensive work is better measured by total cluster-hours and

OOM count. Always call this distinction out; do not let timeout volume masquerade as slowness.

  • Bytes read is the truest cost signal, more than duration (which varies with cache and cluster

load). High bytes against low rows means heavy columns, almost always JSONExtract over a properties

blob. For root-causing individual queries, see the

optimizing-clickhouse-and-hogql-queries skill.

  • Background pipelines usually dominate raw cluster-time (data-modeling DAGs, web-analytics

pre-aggregation). That is expected; weigh them by whether their scan volume is necessary, separately

from user-facing latency.

Report structure

A report should contain, in order:

  • One-line scope: region, window, and the slow definition / exclusions used.
  • Headline numbers table + the cluster-wide totals (all queries) table (total query-seconds,

CPU-seconds, bytes read, OOMs) + the two-populations caveat.

  • Daily distribution table (flag any incident window).
  • Findings, worst first. **Every finding needs at least one concrete query_id + event_date,

linked via the shareable query_link URL** (see references/query-patterns.md) so a reader clicks

straight through to the exact query, plus a hypothesis for why it is slow (from the

optimizing-clickhouse-and-hogql-queries

skill's investigation playbook). Group findings by what they are: a per-tenant incident, the

heaviest cluster-time consumers, user-facing insight slowness, and tight-timeout API noise.

  • A top-consumers-by-resource section (all queries, not just slow): top teams, top API keys, and

top tools (lc_product) ranked by bytes / CPU / wall-time (references/query-patterns.md §4c), calling

out consumers that never trip the slow threshold and the compute-bound vs wait-bound split.

  • A JSON-extracted property table: the top event and person property names pulled from JSON blobs

in the slow set, with the teams using each (references/query-patterns.md §7). These are the

materialization candidates.

  • Concrete recommendations tied to each finding (materialize property X, cap memory per API key,

make pipeline Y incremental, ...). Ground the researchable ones in code (see "Grounding

recommendations in code"): cite the file / function and the specific change, not just "audit X".

  • A delta vs the previous report (step 9): what changed since last time, plus a follow-up check on

each action the previous report recommended (resolved / still open / regressed, with numbers). Omit

this section when there is no previous report.

Save the finished report as analysis/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<topic>.md in the sibling

query-performance-analysis repo, never in the public posthog repo; if that repo is not present, save to

a temp folder (e.g. /tmp/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<topic>.md) and tell the user the path.

References

  • references/query-patterns.md: ready-to-run SQL for every step above, against query_log_archive.
  • references/materialization-analysis.md: finding properties to materialize and columns to drop,

run across both US and EU.

  • references/hogql-deep-dive.md: analyzing HogQLQuery (arbitrary user/AI SQL) specifically,

including how to identify AI-written HogQL (lc_product/lc_feature, not ai_query_source) and the

causes that make ad-hoc and AI queries slow.

This skill is fleet-level: it finds and ranks slow queries across all teams and writes the report. Once a

finding points at one query you want to explain or fix, switch to

optimizing-clickhouse-and-hogql-queries — it

owns root-causing an individual query (its references/investigation-playbook.md) and applying the fix at

the right layer (printer, query runner, or ClickHouse migration).

How to use it

Copy the folder

Take posthog/generating-clickhouse-query-performance-reports from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.

Check the name does not clash

The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.