| From: | Jason Long <mailing(dot)lists(at)octgsoftware(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: comma vs cross join question |
| Date: | 2011-04-08 19:09:37 |
| Message-ID: | 1302289777.7116.59.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 14:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jason Long <mailing(dot)lists(at)octgsoftware(dot)com> writes:
> > I am using 9.0.3 and the only setting I have changed is
> > geqo_effort = 10
>
> > One of the joins is a view join.
>
> Ah. The explain shows there are actually nine base tables in that
> query, which is more than the default join_collapse_limit. Try cranking
> up both join_collapse_limit and from_collapse_limit to 10 or so.
> (I'm not sure offhand if from_collapse_limit affects this case, but it
> might.)
>
> regards, tom lane
I have to say I love this mailing list and thank you Tom for your
expertise.
I played with the settings with the following results.
Worked like a charm
from_collapse_limit = 10
join_collapse_limit = 10
Worked like a charm
from_collapse_limit = 10
join_collapse_limit = 8
Failed
from_collapse_limit = 8
join_collapse_limit = 10
It looks like from_collapse_limit was the key.
I am going to leave them both at 10.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jerry Sievers | 2011-04-08 19:46:27 | Re: Deferred foreign key constraint downsides |
| Previous Message | Jack Christensen | 2011-04-08 19:08:19 | Deferred foreign key constraint downsides |