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 0885752808
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Sun, 17 Jul 2005 01:45:03 -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 92175-10
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Sun, 17 Jul 2005 04:44:54 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 087A25298F
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Sun, 17 Jul 2005 01:44:53 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j6H4irIP025142;
	Sun, 17 Jul 2005 00:44:54 -0400 (EDT)
To: Steven Rosenstein <srosenst@us.ibm.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Questions about temporary tables and performance 
In-reply-to: 
 <OF01136A65.6C2D905D-ON85257040.007514DE-85257040.00773BFE@us.ibm.com>
References: 
 <OF01136A65.6C2D905D-ON85257040.007514DE-85257040.00773BFE@us.ibm.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Steven Rosenstein <srosenst@us.ibm.com>
	message dated "Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:42:21 -0400"
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 00:44:53 -0400
Message-ID: <25141.1121575493@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.006 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200507/237
X-Sequence-Number: 13478

Steven Rosenstein <srosenst@us.ibm.com> writes:
> Are there any performance issues or considerations associated with using a
> temporary table in this scenario?

It's probably worthwhile to ANALYZE the temp table after it's filled,
before you start joining to it.

			regards, tom lane