From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] temporary indexes
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 11:52:11 -0500
Message-ID: <15924.1141145531@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44041B68.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov>
References: <44041B68.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov>
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
> It struck me that it would be outstanding if the planner could
> recognize this sort of situation, and build a temporary index based on
> the snapshot of the data visible to the transaction.
I don't think that's an appropriate solution at all. What it looks like
to me (assuming that explain's estimated row counts are reasonably
on-target) is that the time is all going into the EXISTS subplans. The
real problem here is that we aren't doing anything to convert correlated
EXISTS subqueries into some form of join that's smarter than a raw
nestloop.
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, Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] temporary indexes
In-Reply-To: <15924.1141145531@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