Re: [GENERAL] GEQO and KSQO problem.

From: Herouth Maoz <herouth(at)oumail(dot)openu(dot)ac(dot)il>
To: "Natalya S(dot) Makushina" <mak(at)rtsoft(dot)msk(dot)ru>, "pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] GEQO and KSQO problem.
Date: 1999-09-08 14:25:03
Message-ID: l03130303b3fc21766df8@[147.233.159.109]
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

At 16:00 +0200 on 08/09/1999, Natalya S. Makushina wrote:

> i tried your query.
> This is query plan for select with union clause
> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN:
>...
> I think that it is too slow.
> May be optimizer is more intellect in Postgres v.6.5.1?
> I use Postgres v.6.4.2.

Yes, it's definitely supposed to be better.

By the way, if there are not supposed to be overlaps in the queries (that
is, a query about one email will never return the same tuple that was
returned by a query about another email), you should try UNION ALL. I think
it should remove the unique phases.

By the way, did you try the suggestion with the regular expression? What
was the cost of that?

Herouth

--
Herouth Maoz, Internet developer.
Open University of Israel - Telem project
http://telem.openu.ac.il/~herutma

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Paul 1999-09-08 15:16:54 Web hosting with PostgreSQL?
Previous Message Natalya S. Makushina 1999-09-08 14:00:23 [GENERAL] GEQO and KSQO problem.