From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bryce Nesbitt <bryce1@obviously.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Very slow updates when using IN syntax subselect
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 10:47:42 -0500
Message-ID: <7972.1139672862@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43ED723E.9080305@obviously.com>
References: <43ECFF0B.80905@obviously.com>
<1682.1139607176@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<43ED723E.9080305@obviously.com>
Bryce Nesbitt <bryce1@obviously.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> What does EXPLAIN show for this and for the base query?
> -> Seq Scan on event (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=1 width=408)
> Filter: (reconciled = false)
> select count(*) from event;
> -----------
> 116226
It seems pretty clear that you've never vacuumed nor analyzed these
tables ... else the planner would have some clue about their sizes.
Do that and then see what you get.
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, bryce1@obviously.com
Subject: Re: Very slow updates when using IN syntax subselect
In-Reply-To: <7972.1139672862@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