From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | mathiaskunter(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #17964: Missed query planner optimization |
Date: | 2023-06-06 21:32:10 |
Message-ID: | CAApHDvpj1rjTsOn34K0W9WpVptQHJkMQHt+db0FVWOxVK0OewQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 at 04:44, PG Bug reporting form
<noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> In the example below, the query planner uses a sequential scan (query 1)
> even though it could use an index scan (query 2).
>
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT id, name FROM (SELECT id, name FROM table1 UNION
> SELECT id, name FROM table2) AS q
> WHERE id IN (SELECT id FROM table3);
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT id, name FROM (SELECT id, name FROM table1 UNION
> SELECT id, name FROM table2) AS q
> WHERE id IN (1538,8836,5486,3464,2673);
It's not a bug that the planner does not consider evaluating the join
before the UNION, it's just an optimisation opportunity we don't
currently explore.
If you want that, then write:
EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT id, name FROM table1 WHERE id IN (SELECT id
FROM table3) UNION SELECT id, name FROM table2 WHERE id IN (SELECT id
FROM table3);
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2023-06-07 07:46:20 | BUG #17965: SIGSEGV from LLVM13 JIT when executing SQL. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-06-06 13:07:11 | Re: BUG #17963: Recursive table cannot be referenced when using LEFT JOIN instead of LATERAL in recursive term |