| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jie Li <jay23jack(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: small table left outer join big table |
| Date: | 2010-12-30 21:05:09 |
| Message-ID: | m2fwtfynsq.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I can't get all *that* excited about complicating hash joins as
> proposed. The query is still fundamentally going to be slow because
> you won't get out of having to seqscan the large table. The only way
> to make it really fast is to not read all of the large table, and
> nestloop-with-inner-indexscan is the only plan type with a hope of
> doing that.
That sounds somewhat like Loose Indexscan as described in the following
wiki page, right?
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Loose_indexscan
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2010-12-30 21:08:50 | Re: Sync Rep Design |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-12-30 21:01:18 | Re: Sync Rep Design |