Re: BUG #7570: WHERE .. IN bug from 9.2.0 not fixed in 9.2.1

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Melese Tesfaye <mtesfaye(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #7570: WHERE .. IN bug from 9.2.0 not fixed in 9.2.1
Date: 2012-09-27 05:13:48
Message-ID: 16399.1348722828@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Melese Tesfaye <mtesfaye(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> [ test case ]

Argh. The problem query has a plan like this:

-> Merge Join (cost=1084.06..1354.58 rows=4 width=13)
Merge Cond: (table2_t.pnr_id = a.pnr_id)
-> stuff ...
-> Index Scan using table1_t_pnr_id_idx5 on table1_t a (cost=0.00..12.60 rows=4 width=13)
Index Cond: (pnr_id = ANY ('{1801,2056}'::integer[]))

which means the indexscan has to support mark/restore calls. And it
looks like I blew it on mark/restore support when I taught btree to
handle =ANY conditions natively,
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=9e8da0f75731aaa7605cf4656c21ea09e84d2eb1

Will look into fixing that tomorrow. In the meantime, you should be
able to work around this with "set enable_mergejoin = off".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Melese Tesfaye 2012-09-27 11:16:56 Re: BUG #7570: WHERE .. IN bug from 9.2.0 not fixed in 9.2.1
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2012-09-27 04:15:22 Re: BUG #7571: Query high memory usage