Re: UNION and bad performance

From: pinker <pinker(at)onet(dot)eu>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: UNION and bad performance
Date: 2014-06-08 13:58:55
Message-ID: 1402235935505-5806445.post@n5.nabble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>> rhaas=# explain select a from generate_series(1,100) a union select a
>> from generate_series(1,100) a;
>> QUERY PLAN
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> HashAggregate (cost=45.00..65.00 rows=2000 width=4)
>> -> Append (cost=0.00..40.00 rows=2000 width=4)

Why in this case the estimated number of rows is 2000? Is it standard
planner behavior?

--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/UNION-and-bad-performance-tp3301375p5806445.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G Johnston 2014-06-08 15:53:27 Re: UNION and bad performance
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2014-06-07 01:45:37 Re: