From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Ben <bentenzha(at)outlook(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jerry Sievers <gsievers19(at)comcast(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Obvious data mismatch in View2 which basically SELECT * from View1 |
Date: | 2020-09-17 18:59:47 |
Message-ID: | 236993.1600369187@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Ben <bentenzha(at)outlook(dot)com> <MWHPR06MB2400E1FA4AAD12440EA96B79B93E0(at)MWHPR06MB2400(dot)namprd06(dot)prod(dot)outlook(dot)com> writes:
> You are right none of them is what I originally used to create them
> which should be
> `select * from utlog.stats_per_shift_filtered_b0206`, but they do look
> different,
This discrepancy could explain a lot:
> (stats_per_shift_filtered_u0206.wsft)::character varying AS wsft,
vs
> stats_per_shift_filtered_b0206.wsft,
Your problem query has a WHERE clause testing wsft, so this difference
is subtly affecting what that WHERE clause means. That could result in
a plan change, thereby changing the row output order, which as already
noted would be sufficient to explain the inconsistency.
If I had to bet I'd suspect that the extra cast is blocking use of an
index on wsft.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shaozhong SHI | 2020-09-17 22:59:26 | Postgres as a service for supporting common application users |
Previous Message | Ben | 2020-09-17 17:38:35 | Re: Obvious data mismatch in View2 which basically SELECT * from View1 |