From: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Subject: | Re: performance of IN (subquery) |
Date: | 2004-08-27 20:24:33 |
Message-ID: | 412F9881.1060404@bigfoot.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Greg Stark wrote:
> Ideally I would want a guarantee that every query would *always* result in the
> same plan. Once I've tested them and approved the plans I want to know that
> only those approved plans will ever run, and I want to be present and be able
> to verify new plans before they go into production.
What you are saying is "never run an ANALYZE" or if you do it you have to re-test
all your plans. "*always*" the same plan is a non sense because the plan depends on the
data distribution, do you test your plans for each given histogram slice ?
> I doubt I'm going to convince anyone today...
For sure not me.
Regards
Gaetano Mendola
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2004-08-27 20:37:09 | Re: pg_autovacuum start-script |
Previous Message | Vivek Khera | 2004-08-27 19:58:18 | Re: Deadlocks caused by referential integrity checks |