From: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #9896: Bug in FULL OUTER JOIN |
Date: | 2014-04-07 20:39:28 |
Message-ID: | 53430D00.9040009@dalibo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 04/07/2014 10:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> sqlpro(at)sqlspot(dot)com writes:
>>> SELECT *
>>> FROM T_CLIENT_CLI AS C
>>> FULL OUTER JOIN T_PROSPECT_PSP AS P
>>> ON C.CLI_SIREN = P.PSP_SIREN
>>> OR C.CLI_ENSEIGNE = P.PSP_ENSEIGNE;
>> Can you show us the query plans used by those systems?
> For the archives' sake: the OP sent me a not-too-useful screen shot
> in which SQL Server claims it's using a merge join for this query.
>
> I find this less than credible: what linear sort order would bring
> together all the potentially joinable rows? If they're getting the
> right answer at all, there must be some secret sauce in there someplace.
> Perhaps they're just Doing It The Hard Way with state storage
> proportional to the size of the relations?
And Oracle does it in two steps: http://www.sqlfiddle.com/#!4/607e0/1/0
--
Vik
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | fburgess | 2014-04-07 22:25:14 | Re: Configuring Standby Server in PostgreSQL 9.3.3 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-04-07 20:17:58 | Re: BUG #9896: Bug in FULL OUTER JOIN |