Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4B89FB222 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 06:59:45 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 91140-09 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 06:59:27 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from linda-3.paradise.net.nz (linda-3.paradise.net.nz [203.96.152.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18259FA344 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 06:59:25 -0300 (ADT) Received: from smtp-1.paradise.net.nz (tclsnelb1-src-1.paradise.net.nz [203.96.152.172]) by linda-3.paradise.net.nz (Paradise.net.nz) with ESMTP id <0J700077ZP30VE@linda-3.paradise.net.nz> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 22:59:24 +1300 (NZDT) Received: from [192.168.1.11] (218-101-28-242.dsl.clear.net.nz [218.101.28.242]) by smtp-1.paradise.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150501438504; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 22:59:24 +1300 (NZDT) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 22:59:23 +1300 From: Mark Kirkwood Subject: Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly? In-reply-to: To: "H.J. Sanders" Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <452E11FB.7070704@paradise.net.nz> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20061003) References: X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.035 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200610/230 X-Sequence-Number: 21359 H.J. Sanders wrote: > why not just like in some other (commercial) databases: > > a statement to say: use index ............ > > I know this is against all though but if even the big ones can not resist > the pressure of their users, why not? > Yeah - some could not (e.g. Oracle), but some did (e.g. DB2), and it seemed (to me anyway) significant DB2's optimizer worked much better than Oracle's last time I used both of them (Oracle 8/9 and DB2 7/8). cheers Mark