From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Specifying many rows in a table |
Date: | 2004-01-28 23:13:36 |
Message-ID: | 7713.1075331616@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Steve Atkins wrote:
>> But I may want to extract a large number of rows, many thousands
>> select * from table where id in (1, 3, 5, ...., 100000, 100017, 23000);
> You could try inserting those
> numbers into a temp table and subselecting it.
That's what I'd try too; it should work reasonably well in 7.4. Two
thoughts:
1. Be sure to "analyze" the temp table after filling it. The planner
must know the number of rows in the table to have any shot at choosing a
good plan.
2. If you know that the set of numbers you have emitted are all
different, don't use IN at all, but a straight join to the temp table:
select table.* from table, tmp where id = tmp.id;
With IN the system will have to work harder to eliminate duplicates from
the temp table; why make it do that if you know it's not necessary?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kris Jurka | 2004-01-28 23:35:20 | Re: Is autocommit=true bad? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-01-28 22:42:16 | Re: 7.3.4 freezing |