Re: Composite fields and the query planner

From: Steve Rogerson <steve(dot)pg(at)yewtc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Composite fields and the query planner
Date: 2013-05-07 08:49:16
Message-ID: 5188C00C.3090704@yewtc.demon.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 05/05/13 15:06, Tom Lane wrote:
> Steve Rogerson <steve(dot)pg(at)yewtc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
>> I'm seeing a problem with the query planner not doing what's expected, and I
>> think it is because we are using composite fields. Here is a stripped down
>> example.
>
> I tested this example in HEAD and 9.0.x and didn't see any particular
> problem with rowcount estimates for the get_part1() expression. You
> do have to have the i1 index in place when the table is analyzed, else
> ANALYZE won't collect any stats about the expression.
>
> regards, tom lane

I should have said I am using 9.0.7 - also I have "ANALYZEd" all the relevant
tables. Having said that I am having problems re-creating a rich enough example.

Steve

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Johann Spies 2013-05-07 09:38:34 Insert not finishing
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2013-05-06 23:43:03 Re: "Unlogged indexes"