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

Re: BUG #3826: Very Slow Execution of examplequery (wrong plan?)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Alexander Steffens" <mail(at)a-st(dot)de>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #3826: Very Slow Execution of examplequery (wrong plan?)
Date: 2007-12-19 05:51:19
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> It's possible that MS-SQL is doing something analogous to the
>> hashed-subplan approach (hopefully with suitable tweaking for the NULL
>> case) but even then it's hard to see how it could take only 9 sec.
>> The cartesian product is too big.

> Fwiw it seems MS-SQL is doing something funny. The three plans posted in the
> screenshots for the "small", "mediu", and "large" cases are:
> ...
> Postgres is doing something equivalent to the first plan.

Hmm.  I think the second plan is probably equivalent to the
hashed-subplan behavior that you can get in PG by rewriting the query to
NOT IN as I illustrated.  The third plan looks to be the same thing plus
some parallelization frammishes.

I'm not clear on what "small/medium/large" means, in particular not on
which of these corresponds to the OP's report of 9-second execution.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: iuri de araujo sampaioDate: 2007-12-19 06:48:33
Subject: Re: ltree installation error
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-12-19 05:29:58
Subject: Re: ltree installation error

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group