| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martin Kos <martin(dot)kos(at)molecularhealth(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bug in execution of EXISTS and IN clauses for large tables |
| Date: | 2022-02-22 14:21:05 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwZu-JTRz2R6+Xshm3-VzYEctzMo7hjj4Zn+dVcXypJHMA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tuesday, February 22, 2022, David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, February 22, 2022, Martin Kos <martin(dot)kos(at)molecularhealth(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I would like to report an unexpected behavior of the queries using either
>> the EXISTS or IN clauses.
>>
>>
>> I am using PostgreSQL version 11.1 (accessed via the DBVisualizer).
>>
>>
>>
> Reporting bugs without a standalone reproducer against long unsupported
> versions is generally inactionable.
>
> Though at minimum providing explain analyze results, especially if you
> have a near equivalent query that supposedly works, is needed.
>
>
My bad, too early for me…
This seems like a decent report (haven’t played with it), still, version
11.1!
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-02-22 15:45:08 | Re: Bug in execution of EXISTS and IN clauses for large tables |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2022-02-22 14:17:53 | Re: Bug in execution of EXISTS and IN clauses for large tables |