Re: Very slow updates when using IN syntax subselect

Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>
>> Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
>>
>>> They occur in finite time. That's good, thanks. But jeeze, can't
>>> postgres figure this out for itself?
>>>
>> I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate it if PostgreSQL did a full table scan
>> before each query to figure out the total size of the involved tables.
>>
>
> It's also less than polite to complain about the behavior of
> two-year-old releases, without making any effort to ascertain
> whether more-current versions are smarter.
>
Sorry to offend. Are current versions smarter?
The DB I was working with still had row counts of 1 after tens of thousands
of records had been added.

With new versions, must the DB still be VACUUMED, or is that a bit
more automatic?