Re: Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster?

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Ulrich" <ulrich(dot)mierendorff(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster?
Date: 2008-06-29 12:08:57
Message-ID: 87k5g8phnq.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

"Ulrich" <ulrich(dot)mierendorff(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:

> Hi,
> Yes that looks strange. But it is not possible that I have processors in
> "users_processors" which do not appear in "processors", because
> "users_processors" contains foreign keys to "processors".
>
> If I remove the LIMIT 10 OFFSET 1 the line "Sort (cost=.... rows=11.."
> disappears and the query return 13 correct processors from "processors".

Oh, er, my bad. That makes perfect sense. The "actual" numbers can be affected
by what records are actually requested. The LIMIT prevents the records beyond
11 from ever being requested even though they exist.

While the bitmap heap scan has to fetch all the records even though they don't
all get used, the nested loop only fetches the records as requested.

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Smith 2008-06-29 18:59:39 Re: A guide/tutorial to performance monitoring and tuning
Previous Message Ulrich 2008-06-29 10:15:25 Re: Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster?