Does anybody know why the planner treats "= ANY(ARRAY(select ...))"
differently than "IN(select ...)"?
Which one is preferable, when I already have a lot of joins?
2011/5/17 Clemens Eisserer <linuxhippy(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>> select .... from t1 left join t2 .... WHERE id IN (select ....)
>> Does it work as expected with one less join? If so, try increasing
>> join_collapse_limit ...
> That did the trick - thanks a lot. I only had to increase
> join_collapse_limit a bit and now get an almost perfect plan.
> Instead of hash-joining all the data, the planner generates
> nested-loop-joins with index only on the few rows I fetch.
> Using = ANY(array(select... )) also seems to work, I wonder which one
> works better. Does ANY(ARRAY(...)) force the optimizer to plan the
> subquery seperated from the main query?
> Thanks, Clemens
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Dave Johansen||Date: 2011-05-18 14:00:50|
|Subject: Re: hash semi join caused by "IN (select ...)"|
|Previous:||From: Stefan Keller||Date: 2011-05-17 22:07:05|
|Subject: Re: KVP table vs. hstore - hstore performance (Was:
Postgres NoSQL emulation)|