From: Glyn Astill <glynastill@yahoo.co.uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Planner picking topsey turvey plan?
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 13:14:15 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <161682.80009.qm@web23604.mail.ird.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5092.1228701731@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
>
> You've provided no evidence that this is a bad plan.
>
Looks like I didn't take the time to understand properly what the explains were showing.
> In particular, the plan you seem to think would be better
> would involve
> an estimated 153 iterations of the cost-15071 hash
> aggregation, which
> simple arithmetic shows is more expensive than the plan it
> did choose.
>
I'd totally missed that all the cost was in the view that I'd created.
Thanks tom
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: glynastill@yahoo.co.uk, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Planner picking topsey turvey plan?
In-Reply-To: <161682.80009.qm@web23604.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox