From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stefan Keller <sfkeller(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Craig James <cjames(at)emolecules(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slow query: Select all buildings that have >1 pharmacies and >1 schools within 1000m |
Date: | 2012-08-08 00:50:32 |
Message-ID: | CAMkU=1xPh0mjyK-2VU3i9HFSP_zckJzFMRAbR+QvGxpQWE+qwg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Stefan Keller <sfkeller(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi Craig
>
> Clever proposal!
> I slightly tried to adapt it to the hstore involved.
> Now I'm having a weird problem that PG says that "relation 'p' does not exist".
> Why does PG recognize table b in the subquery but not table p?
> Any ideas?
I don't think it does recognize b, either. It just fell over on p
before it had a chance to fall over on b.
I think you have to use WITH if you want to reference the same
subquery in multiple FROMs.
Another approach would be to add explicit conditions for there being
at least 1 school and 1 pharmacy within distance. There can't be >1
unless there is >=1, but the join possibilities for >=1 (i.e. "where
exists" rather than "where (select count(*)...)>1" ) are much more
attractive than the ones for >1.
Cheers,
Jeff
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2012-08-08 06:33:02 | Re: Postgresql - performance of using array in big database |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2012-08-08 00:42:17 | Re: Is drop/restore trigger transactional? |