| From: | Jean-Max Reymond <jmreymond(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Optimizing a request |
| Date: | 2004-08-31 20:26:05 |
| Message-ID: | 4b09a0c040831132633b2bce5@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:13:58 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> That seems like a very strange plan choice given those estimated row
> counts. I'd have expected it to use a nestloop with inner index scan
> on article_rub_id_index. You haven't done anything odd like disable
> nestloop, have you?
>
no optimizer disabled.
> What plan do you get if you turn off enable_hashjoin? (If it's a merge
> join, then turn off enable_mergejoin and try again.) Also, could we see
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE not just EXPLAIN output for all these cases?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
OK, TOM Thanks for your help
--
Jean-Max Reymond
CKR Solutions
http://www.ckr-solutions.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gary Doades | 2004-08-31 20:31:44 | Re: Optimizing a request |
| Previous Message | Jean-Max Reymond | 2004-08-31 20:24:51 | Re: Optimizing a request |