Subject: Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly?
From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "Jim C. Nasby" <jim@nasby.net>, Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz>,
	"H.J. Sanders" <hjs@rmax.nl>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <10362.1160664260@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <GMEAJIDMNDKCIHMMHDFLEEOHEGAA.hjs@rmax.nl>
	<452E11FB.7070704@paradise.net.nz> <20061012135248.GS28647@nasby.net>
	<10362.1160664260@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1160675982.6181.61.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 12:59:42 -0500

On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 09:44, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <jim@nasby.net> writes:
> > If someone's going to commit to putting effort into improving the
> > planner then that's wonderful. But I can't recall any significant
> > planner improvements since min/max (which I'd argue was more of a bug
> > fix than an improvement).
> 
> Hmph.  Apparently I've wasted most of the last five years.

I appreciate the work, and trust me, I've noticed the changes in the
query planner over time.  

Thanks for the hard work, and I'm sure there are plenty of other
thankful people too.