Re: IN vs EXISTS equivalence

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "<Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: IN vs EXISTS equivalence
Date: 2008-08-05 16:33:59
Message-ID: 48983AA7.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 6:48 PM, in message
<15026(dot)1217893692(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
>> I'm adding some NOT EXISTS examples to the thread for completeness
of
>> what someone might want to address while working on it. For two
>> queries which can easily be shown (to a human viewer, anyway) to
>> return identical results, I see performance differences of over
five
>> orders of magnitude.
>
> Could we see EXPLAIN ANALYZE not just EXPLAIN for these? When
people
> are complaining of bad planner behavior, I don't find bare EXPLAIN
> output to be very convincing.

The other five queries have a cost to millisecond ratio of between 9.8
and 267. If the expensive one falls in the same range, it will run
for 2.3 to 64 years. I know I have left it running for days before
without completion. I don't think I can devote the resources to it.
Attached are the EXPLAIN ANALYZE output for the other five.

-Kevin

Attachment Content-Type Size
not-exists-timings2.out application/octet-stream 4.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2008-08-05 16:39:42 Re: Parsing of pg_hba.conf and authentication inconsistencies
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-08-05 16:29:46 Re: Status of DISTINCT-by-hashing work