X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98E9452800
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  8 Aug 2005 22:09:01 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 46006-03
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  9 Aug 2005 01:08:50 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from cassarossa.samfundet.no (cassarossa.samfundet.no
	[129.241.93.19])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 245B0528F6
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  8 Aug 2005 22:08:49 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from trofast.ipv6.sesse.net ([2001:700:300:dc03:20e:cff:fe36:a766]
	helo=trofast.sesse.net)
	by cassarossa.samfundet.no with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1E2Ibr-00069y-Cc
	for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 03:08:51 +0200
Received: from sesse by trofast.sesse.net with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 1E2Ibq-00052V-00
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 03:08:50 +0200
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 03:08:50 +0200
From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Why hash join instead of nested loop?
Message-ID: <20050809010850.GA18938@uio.no>
Mail-Followup-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
References: <41b0fe890508051135712a086b@mail.gmail.com>
	<001801c59a0a$f4be7480$9a00a8c0@OTTO>
	<41b0fe8905080516164464e04f@mail.gmail.com>
	<15425.1123304631@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<41b0fe89050808100021a2a4fc@mail.gmail.com>
	<10930.1123549106@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <10930.1123549106@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.11.8 on a i686
X-Message-Flag: Outlook? --> http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.017 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200508/72
X-Sequence-Number: 13819

On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 08:58:26PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hmph.  There is something really strange going on here.  I tried to
> duplicate your problem in 7.4.*, thus:

PostgreSQL 7.4.7 (Debian sarge):

<create table and stuff, exactly the same as you>

regression=# explain analyze select rtmessagestate.* from rtmessagestate,connection where (connection_registry_id =  40105) AND (obj1  = 73582) and id = obj2;

                                                                     QUERY PLAN                                                                     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hash Join  (cost=4.83..5.91 rows=1 width=14) (actual time=0.155..0.159 rows=1 loops=1)
   Hash Cond: ("outer".id = "inner".obj2)
   ->  Seq Scan on rtmessagestate  (cost=0.00..1.05 rows=5 width=14) (actual time=0.003..0.006 rows=5 loops=1)
   ->  Hash  (cost=4.83..4.83 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=0.026..0.026 rows=0 loops=1)
         ->  Index Scan using connection_regid_obj1_index on connection  (cost=0.00..4.83 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=0.011..0.012 rows=1 loops=1)
               Index Cond: ((connection_registry_id = 40105) AND (obj1 = 73582))
 Total runtime: 0.215 ms
(7 rows)

This is an Opteron (in 32-bit mode), though.

/* Steinar */
-- 
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/