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
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? |