| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Richard Huxton" <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, "Sergey Konoplev" <gray(dot)ru(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Very slow queries w/ NOT IN preparation (seems like a bug, test case) |
| Date: | 2008-11-12 18:16:40 |
| Message-ID: | 18538.1226513800@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
"Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I guess my question is, what's the real benefit of going to all this
> trouble trying to prove that clauses are false?
Not having to scan gigabytes of data in an excluded partition, for
instance.
Now the docs do say
Currently, constraint_exclusion is disabled by default because
the constraint checks are relatively expensive, and in many
circumstances will yield no savings. It is recommended to turn
this on only if you are actually using partitioned tables
designed to take advantage of the feature.
so we could argue that it's the OP's own fault if he turns this option
on for queries where long planning time isn't worth the trouble.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Raymond O'Donnell | 2008-11-12 18:20:09 | Re: missing FROM-clause entry for table |
| Previous Message | Adriana Alfonzo | 2008-11-12 18:10:44 | Re: Upgrading side by side in Gentoo |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-11-12 18:26:22 | Re: [GENERAL] Very slow queries w/ NOT IN preparation (seems like a bug, test case) |
| Previous Message | Brendan Jurd | 2008-11-12 18:03:41 | Re: [GENERAL] Very slow queries w/ NOT IN preparation (seems like a bug, test case) |