| From: | Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, "H(dot)J(dot) Sanders" <hjs(at)rmax(dot)nl>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly? |
| Date: | 2006-10-12 17:59:42 |
| Message-ID: | 1160675982.6181.61.camel@state.g2switchworks.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 09:44, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> writes:
> > If someone's going to commit to putting effort into improving the
> > planner then that's wonderful. But I can't recall any significant
> > planner improvements since min/max (which I'd argue was more of a bug
> > fix than an improvement).
>
> Hmph. Apparently I've wasted most of the last five years.
I appreciate the work, and trust me, I've noticed the changes in the
query planner over time.
Thanks for the hard work, and I'm sure there are plenty of other
thankful people too.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brendan Curran | 2006-10-12 18:05:04 | Re: Scrub one large table against another |
| Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2006-10-12 17:45:03 | Re: [PERFORM] Hints proposal |