| From: | "Omar Bettin" <o(dot)bettin(at)informaticaindustriale(dot)it> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Jan Urbański' <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Monster query |
| Date: | 2011-10-24 17:16:28 |
| Message-ID: | 000f01cc9270$af09f6c0$0d1de440$@informaticaindustriale.it |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Since the data are of third parties, will prepare a database suitable for the purpose.
In any case, the compressed backup will be around 20 MB.
Regards,
Omar Bettin
-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Jan Urbański [mailto:wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org]
Inviato: lunedì 24 ottobre 2011 18:56
A: Omar Bettin
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Oggetto: Re: [HACKERS] [9.1] unusable for large views
On 24/10/11 10:57, Omar Bettin wrote:
>
> [monster query]
I see that your problem is already solved, but incidentially I'm working on a join order planning module and I'm looking for real-life examples of humongous queries like that to benchmark against them.
Any chance you could share the schema, or at least part of it, that goes with this query? Or perhaps you have more of these queries?
Cheers,
Jan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-10-24 17:17:26 | Re: [PATCH] Use new oom_score_adj without a new compile-time constant |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-10-24 17:08:30 | Re: Unreproducible bug in snapshot import code |