| From: | Scara Maccai <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: totally different plan when using partitions |
| Date: | 2009-08-14 07:12:24 |
| Message-ID: | 319862.85586.qm@web24601.mail.ird.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Hmmm ... why is the inner Nested Loop estimated to produce
> 30120 rows,
> when the cartesian product of its inputs would only be 285
> * 14 = 3990
> rows?
Oh my... didn't notice it!!!
> What PG version is this
That was 8.4 beta1; now tried on
select version()
"PostgreSQL 8.4.0 on sparc-sun-solaris2.10, compiled by cc: Sun C 5.9 SunOS_sparc Patch 124867-02 2007/11/27, 64-bit"
And got same thing:
http://explain-analyze.info/query_plans/3820-query-plan-2526
, and can you extract a
> self-contained
> test case with an equally silly estimate?
mmh... I'll try to "squeeze" the data I'm using and see if it still gets that plan.
How big a test case could be? Could I post it (ftp?) somewhere? (you can email me about this in private if you want)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2009-08-14 07:31:29 | Re: totally different plan when using partitions |
| Previous Message | Skylar Saveland | 2009-08-14 06:54:20 | drop key translation |