| From: | Dani Oderbolz <oderbolz(at)ecologic(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: "SELECT IN" Still Broken in 7.4b |
| Date: | 2003-08-21 10:05:14 |
| Message-ID: | 3F44995A.8040308@ecologic.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Stephan Szabo wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Rod Taylor wrote:
>...
>
>
>>Is the temp table version any faster? I realize it has a higher limit
>>to the number of items you can have in the list.
>>
>>
>
>Within the scope of the new hashed IN stuff I believe so in at least some
>cases. I have a few million row table of integers where searching for
>values IN (~10000 values) takes longer than creating the temp table,
>copying into it and doing the in subquery. That's not a particularly
>meaningful test case, but sending the psql output to /dev/null gives me: ...
>
But where do your values come from in the first place?
Couldn't you optimize your model so that you don't have to copy around
such amounts of data?
Regards,
Dani
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Pflug | 2003-08-21 10:30:58 | Re: [HACKERS] Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-08-21 09:15:03 | Re: Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" bullet list |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2003-08-21 17:28:53 | Re: "SELECT IN" Still Broken in 7.4b |
| Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2003-08-21 07:38:41 | Re: "SELECT IN" Still Broken in 7.4b |