Arjen van der Meijden <acmmailing(at)tweakers(dot)net> writes:
> PS, In case any of the planner-hackers are reading, here are the plans
> of the first two queries, just to see if something can be done to
> decrease the differences between them.
Increase work_mem? It's not taking the hash because it thinks it won't
fit in memory ...
There is a bug here, I'd say: the rowcount estimate ought to be the same
either way. Dunno why it's not, but will look --- I see the same
misbehavior with a toy table here.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Luke Lonergan||Date: 2007-01-18 22:41:30|
|Subject: Re: Postgres and really huge tables|
|Previous:||From: Jeremy Haile||Date: 2007-01-18 21:53:21|
|Subject: Re: Autoanalyze settings with zero scale factor|