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

Re: Posible planner improvement?

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: Albert Cervera Areny <albert(at)sedifa(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Posible planner improvement?
Date: 2008-05-21 10:48:05
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
Albert Cervera Areny wrote:
> I've got a query similar to this:
> select * from t1, t2 where > 158507 and =;
> That took > 84 minutes (the query was a bit longer but this is the part that 
> made the difference) after a little change the query took ~1 second:
> select * from t1, t2 where > 158507 and > 158507 and = 

Try posting EXPLAIN ANALYSE SELECT ... for both of those queries and 
we'll see why it's better at the second one.

   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Albert Cervera ArenyDate: 2008-05-21 11:11:24
Subject: Re: Posible planner improvement?
Previous:From: Frank DekervelDate: 2008-05-21 10:37:22
Subject: Re: "append" takes a lot of time in a query

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