From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Tim Jones <TJones@optio.com>
Cc: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
Cc: Dave Dutcher <dave@tridecap.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: joining two tables slow due to sequential scan
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 17:51:50 -0500
Message-ID: <2937.1139611910@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47668A1334CDBF46927C1A0DFEB223D313131D@mail.optiosoftware.com>
References: <47668A1334CDBF46927C1A0DFEB223D313131D@mail.optiosoftware.com>
"Tim Jones" <TJones@optio.com> writes:
> QUERY PLAN
> 'Hash Join (cost=899.83..4384.17 rows=482 width=1350) (actual
> time=0.203..0.203 rows=0 loops=1)'
> ...
> 'Total runtime: 0.392 ms'
Hardly seems like evidence of a performance problem ...
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, smarlowe@g2switchworks.com, dave@tridecap.com
Subject: Re: joining two tables slow due to sequential scan
In-Reply-To: <2937.1139611910@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