From: | "ldh(at)laurent-hasson(dot)com" <ldh(at)laurent-hasson(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Zero throughput on a query on a very large table. |
Date: | 2019-01-25 18:36:21 |
Message-ID: | BN6PR15MB1185E4664C980E40D1450B06859B0@BN6PR15MB1185.namprd15.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Sorry :) When i look at the "SQL" tab in PGAdmin when i select the index in the schema browser. But you are right that /d doesn't show that.
________________________________
From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 1:34:01 PM
To: ldh(at)laurent-hasson(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Zero throughput on a query on a very large table.
"ldh(at)laurent-hasson(dot)com" <ldh(at)laurent-hasson(dot)com> writes:
> Also, the original statement i implemented did not have all of that. This is the normalized SQL that Postgres now gives when looking at the indices.
[ squint... ] What do you mean exactly by "Postgres gives that"?
I don't see any redundant COLLATE clauses in e.g. psql \d.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | ldh@laurent-hasson.com | 2019-01-25 19:06:54 | Re: Zero throughput on a query on a very large table. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-01-25 18:34:01 | Re: Zero throughput on a query on a very large table. |