From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Tim Jones <TJones@optio.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: strange query behavior
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 16:58:55 -0500
Message-ID: <12115.1166047135@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47668A1334CDBF46927C1A0DFEB223D39F79FA@mail.optiosoftware.com>
References: <47668A1334CDBF46927C1A0DFEB223D39F79A5@mail.optiosoftware.com>
<10648.1166037392@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<47668A1334CDBF46927C1A0DFEB223D39F79FA@mail.optiosoftware.com>
"Tim Jones" <TJones@optio.com> writes:
> The tables for theses queries are vacuumed and analyzed regularly. I
> just did an analyze to be sure and here are the results
> ...
There's something pretty wacko about the choice of plan in the slow case
--- I don't see why it'd not have used the same plan structure as for
the IN case. It's coming up with a cost a lot higher than for the
other, so it certainly knows this isn't a great plan ...
Which PG version is this exactly? Are you running with any nondefault
planner parameters?
regards, tom lane
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, TJones@optio.com
Subject: Re: strange query behavior
In-Reply-To: <12115.1166047135@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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