Received: from MAIL01.stbernard.com (mail01.stbernard.com [64.154.93.162])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 23F10475DE2; Fri, 12 Jul 2002 11:29:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by MAIL01.stbernard.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
	id <3XM9L026>; Fri, 12 Jul 2002 08:30:04 -0700
Message-ID: <7C760DAA511DC74B99E7D22189F786F101BF211D@MAIL01.stbernard.com>
From: Jie Liang <jie@stbernard.com>
To: 'Dmitry Tkach' <dmitry@openratings.com>,
	Jie Liang <jie@stbernard.com>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Please, HELP! Why is the query plan so wrong???
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 08:29:55 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="KOI8-R"
X-Archive-Number: 200207/831
X-Sequence-Number: 27318

please copy and paste the whole msg and your query!
Note:what I mean ' join key' is the fields that link two tables.
I don't think fb.b=0 is a join key!



Jie Liang

-----Original Message-----
From: Dmitry Tkach [mailto:dmitry@openratings.com]
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 7:34 AM
To: Jie Liang
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org; pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Please, HELP! Why is the query plan so wrong???


Jie Liang wrote:

>I believe that SQL will use the index of join 'key' when you join the
tables
>if
>have any, in your query the (a,c) is the join key but d is not.
>
>
>Jie Liang
>

Not really... I tried this:

explain select * from fb joing fbr on (fb.a=fbr.a and
fb.c=fbr.c and fbr.d is null) where fb.b=0

It results in the same query plan (seq scan on fbr).

Dima




>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dmitry Tkach [mailto:dmitry@openratings.com]
>Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 3:51 PM
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org; pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
>Subject: [SQL] Please, HELP! Why is the query plan so wrong???
>
>
>Hi, everybody!
>
>Here is the problem:
>
>test=#   create table fb (a int, b int, c datetime);
>CREATE
>test=#  create table fbr (a int, c datetime, d int);
>CREATE
>test=# create unique index fb_idx on fb(b);
>CREATE
>test=#  create index fbr_idx on fbr(a,c) where d is null;
>CREATE
>test=# set enable_seqscan=off;
>
>SET VARIABLE
>rapidb=# explain select * from fb, fbr where fb.b=0 and fb.a=fbr.a and
>fb.c=fbr.c and fbr.d is null;
>NOTICE:  QUERY PLAN:
>
>Hash Join  (cost=100000005.82..100001015.87 rows=1 width=32)
>   ->  Seq Scan on fbr  (cost=100000000.00..100001010.00 rows=5 width=16)
>   ->  Hash  (cost=5.81..5.81 rows=1 width=16)
>         ->  Index Scan using fb_idx on fb  (cost=0.00..5.81 rows=1
>width=16)
>
>Could someone PLEASE explain to me, why doesn't it want to use the index on
>fbr?
>
>If I get rid of the join, then it works:
>
>test=#  explain select * from fbr where a=1 and c=now() and d is null;
>NOTICE:  QUERY PLAN:
>
>Index Scan using fbr_idx on fbr  (cost=0.00..5.82 rows=1 width=16)
>
>What's the catch???
>
>Any help would be greatly appreciated!
>
>Thanks!
>
>Dima
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>