From: | "A(dot) Kretschmer" <andreas(dot)kretschmer(at)schollglas(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: many 'OR' in WHERE-condition |
Date: | 2007-04-20 11:29:30 |
Message-ID: | 20070420112930.GE15322@a-kretschmer.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
am Fri, dem 20.04.2007, um 12:03:44 +0100 mailte Richard Huxton folgendes:
> A. Kretschmer wrote:
> >in a SELECT with a condition 'WHERE foo IN (1,2,3,4,...)' with a large
> ...
> >But if the list increase the planner choose an seq-scan. The amount of
> >values in the list is about 200 and the table has about 250.000 rows.
> >
> >How can we avoid the seq-scan?
>
> Are you sure you'd want to? What plan have you found to be faster with
> 200 tests?
It's not my problem - i found it in a forum (german)
http://pg-forum.de/showthread.php?t=1332
If the list contains up to 195 entrys -> up to 195 bitmap index scans
and BitmapOr -> 7.839ms
If the list contains 196 entrys -> seq-scan -> 5591.567ms
Andreas
--
Andreas Kretschmer
Kontakt: Heynitz: 035242/47150, D1: 0160/7141639 (mehr: -> Header)
GnuPG-ID: 0x3FFF606C, privat 0x7F4584DA http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2007-04-20 11:59:01 | Re: many 'OR' in WHERE-condition |
Previous Message | Bart Degryse | 2007-04-20 11:14:49 | Re: We all are looped on Internet: request + transport = invariant |