Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBEB3B5DBD7 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 08:07:04 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 99478-06 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 11:06:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from www.postnewspapers.com.au (www.postnewspapers.com.au [173.230.139.50]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78F6B5DBBC for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 08:06:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.postnewspapers.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id A107E2D; Mon, 16 May 2011 07:06:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at postnewspapers.com.au.com Received: from www.postnewspapers.com.au ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (www.postnewspapers.com.au [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id jNQkMSfRYqhe; Mon, 16 May 2011 07:06:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.postnewspapers.com.au (ppp171-128.static.internode.on.net [150.101.171.128]) by www.postnewspapers.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C1B27; Mon, 16 May 2011 07:06:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.postnewspapers.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 533F7AE633; Mon, 16 May 2011 19:06:46 +0800 (WST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at postnewspapers.com.au Received: from mail.postnewspapers.com.au ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.postnewspapers.com.au [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 2QZPbQpGVxNj; Mon, 16 May 2011 19:06:40 +0800 (WST) Received: from [10.1.1.5] (124-169-254-58.dyn.iinet.net.au [124.169.254.58]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Craig Ringer", Issuer "POST Certificate Authority" (verified OK)) by mail.postnewspapers.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5EAA4AE628; Mon, 16 May 2011 19:06:40 +0800 (WST) Message-ID: <4DD10533.7050904@postnewspapers.com.au> Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 19:06:27 +0800 From: Craig Ringer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110428 Fedora/3.1.10-1.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jasmin Dizdarevic CC: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Performance of NOT IN and <> with PG 9.0.4 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201105/97 X-Sequence-Number: 35381 On 05/16/2011 06:05 PM, Jasmin Dizdarevic wrote: > Hi, > > is there a reason why Not IN-performance is so poor in 9.0.4 compared to > 8.4? Example queries? EXPLAIN ANALYZE output? http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SlowQueryQuestions -- Craig Ringer