Re: ANTI-JOIN needs table, index scan not possible?

From: "hans wulf" <lotu1(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Maciek Sakrejda <msakrejda(at)truviso(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ANTI-JOIN needs table, index scan not possible?
Date: 2011-03-11 17:54:39
Message-ID: 20110311175439.6380@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Thanks for the answer.

so there's no way around this problem? A nice index bitmap merge thing would be super fast. Big table ANTI JOIN queries with only a few results expected, are totally broken, if this is true.

This way the query breaks my neck. This is a massive downside of postgres which makes this kind of query impossible. Mysql gives you the answer in a few seconds :-(

> Possibly because the index entries you're anti-joining against may
> point to deleted tuples, so you would erroneously omit rows from the
> join result if you skip the visibility check?
>
> ---
> Maciek Sakrejda | System Architect | Truviso
>
> 1065 E. Hillsdale Blvd., Suite 215
> Foster City, CA 94404
> (650) 242-3500 Main
> www.truviso.com

--
Schon gehört? GMX hat einen genialen Phishing-Filter in die
Toolbar eingebaut! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/toolbar

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-03-11 18:31:44 Re: Table partitioning problem
Previous Message Maciek Sakrejda 2011-03-11 17:18:19 Re: ANTI-JOIN needs table, index scan not possible?