From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Lucas Madar <madar(at)samsix(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Poor performance when joining against inherited tables |
Date: | 2011-05-11 17:00:26 |
Message-ID: | 508.1305133226@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> A more interesting question is why you're not getting a plan like this:
> Nested Loop
> -> Seq Scan on objects
> -> Append
> -> Index Scan using xxx_pkey on itemXX
> -> Index Scan using yyy_pkey on itemYY
> -> Index Scan using zzz_pkey on itemZZ
Probably because there are 4 million rows in the objects table.
Or maybe it's a pre-8.2 database and can't even generate such a plan.
But if it did generate it, it would almost certainly have decided that
this was more expensive than a hash or merge join.
People have this weird idea that the existence of an index ought to make
enormous joins free ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pierre C | 2011-05-11 18:10:54 | Re: Postgres refusing to use >1 core |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-05-11 16:38:44 | Re: Poor performance when joining against inherited tables |