From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | large scale <largescale_1999(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Join of small table with large table |
Date: | 2002-05-13 16:09:39 |
Message-ID: | 20020513090304.W99254-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 10 May 2002, large scale wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have two tables, one has 25000 rows and the other
> has 6.5 million rows.
>
> (25000 rows)
> table1
> (id text,
> start int,
> stop int)
>
> with seperate index on three individual fiels.
>
> 6.5 million rows
> table2
> (id text,
> start int,
> stop int)
>
> with seperate index on three individual fields.
We'll start with the standard questions: Have you
vacuum analyzed? What version are you running? (if
it's less than 7.2, you may want to see about
upgrading) If you do a set enable_seqscan=false;
what does the explain show then? I'd be interested
in know if 1024601931 is even remotely a valid number
of rows from that join as well (which is about
.5% of an entire cartesian join if my math is right).
Perhaps some exists style thing would be faster since
that would at least presumably be able to stop when
it found a matching table2 row for a particular table1
id.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2002-05-13 16:30:17 | Re: strange explain |
Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2002-05-13 16:08:36 | Re: strange explain |