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

Re: Query optimizing

From: "Sebastian Ritter" <ritter(dot)sebastian(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Richard Huxton" <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Query optimizing
Date: 2008-11-10 13:39:50
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-sql
Cheers for you help guys. Having filtered and then joined has substantially
reduced the run time.

Much obliged,

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> wrote:

> Sebastian Ritter wrote:
> > Could it have something
> > to do with the fact that it is a subquery and thus the planner can not
> > deduce filtering conditions from the outer query against it? My
> apologises
> > if that made no sense.
> Could make a difference.
> > In summary, what im trying to understand is the following: Will there be
> a
> > performance difference between filtering query sets first and then
> joining
> > them together as opposed to joining first and then filtering? Does the
> > opitmiser not choose the best course of action either way yielding the
> same
> > result?
> There obviously is a performance difference between joining all of the
> issues table versus joining 1% of it to followups.
> In most cases the planner can push the condition into the subquery, but
> not in all cases because:
>  1. It's not provably correct to do so
>  2. The planner isn't smart enough to figure out that it can
> It's impossible to say which applies to you without knowing the full query.
> --
>  Richard Huxton
>  Archonet Ltd

In response to

pgsql-sql by date

Next:From: Mario SplivaloDate: 2008-11-10 14:01:33
Subject: Using UTF strings in pg8.3 - storing hexadecimal values in bytea columns
Previous:From: Richard HuxtonDate: 2008-11-10 12:32:42
Subject: Re: Query optimizing

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