From: | Steve Clark <sclark(at)netwolves(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: best way to query |
Date: | 2008-01-25 17:19:18 |
Message-ID: | 479A1A16.9090406@netwolves.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Steve Clark <sclark(at)netwolves(dot)com> writes:
>
>>Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>>Also, whatever is the ORDER BY for?
>
>
>>without the order by it wants to do a seq scan of t_unit_event_log.
>>see below:
>> explain select count(*) from t_event_ack_log where event_log_no not
>>in (select event_log_no from t_unit_event_log);
>> QUERY PLAN
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Aggregate (cost=12144872193.82..12144872193.82 rows=1 width=0)
>> -> Seq Scan on t_event_ack_log (cost=0.00..12144871485.07
>>rows=283497 width=0)
>> Filter: (NOT (subplan))
>> SubPlan
>> -> Seq Scan on t_unit_event_log (cost=0.00..40286.56
>>rows=1021156 width=4)
>>(5 rows)
>
>
> Hmm, the big problem with that isn't the seqscan but the lack of a
> Materialize step to buffer it; which says to me that you're running a
> pretty old Postgres version (8.0 or older). You should think about an
> update if you're running into performance issues.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
Hi Tom,
Actually this is
show server_version;
server_version
----------------
8.2.5
On FreeBSD 6.2
And Daniel gave me a query that does the job in just a few seconds.
Thanks,
Steve
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Geoffrey | 2008-01-25 19:34:36 | what is it that \d actually does |
Previous Message | Steve Clark | 2008-01-25 17:15:43 | Re: best way to query |