Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: merge join killing performance

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Matthew Wakeling <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: merge join killing performance
Date: 2010-05-28 02:46:21
Message-ID: AANLkTinBVZmcknJjIQGr_suUnlOoBE8uxG-vGfiA7KWQ@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> So, Tom, so you think it's possible that the planner isn't noticing
>> all those nulls and thinks it'll just take a row or two to get to the
>> value it needs to join on?
>
> I've committed a patch for this, if you're interested in testing that
> it fixes your situation.

Cool, do we have a snapshot build somewhere or do I need to get all
the extra build bits like flex or yacc or bison or whatnot?

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-05-28 02:56:12
Subject: Re: merge join killing performance
Previous:From: Mark WongDate: 2010-05-28 01:24:17
Subject: hp hpsa vs cciss driver

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-05-28 02:47:57
Subject: Re: tsvector pg_stats seems quite a bit off.
Previous:From: Fujii MasaoDate: 2010-05-28 02:42:50
Subject: Re: quoting and recovery.conf

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group