From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Harald Fuchs" <hari(dot)fuchs(at)googlemail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Problem with planner choosing nested loop |
Date: | 2008-04-02 19:21:04 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10804021221i1c3149f8q8593b9f440274614@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Harald Fuchs <hari(dot)fuchs(at)googlemail(dot)com> wrote:
> In article <a55915760804021107h4410dd93m33a6f94e28a83a2b(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>,
>
> "Rodrigo E. De León Plicet" <rdeleonp(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Alex Solovey <a(dot)solovey(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> ... I have no idea how it could be fixed.
>
> > - CREATE INDEX xifoo ON foo(bar_id);
> > - ANALYZE;
> > - Retry.
>
> A compound index
> CREATE INDEX xifoo2 ON foo (foo_a, bar_id)
> might be more worthwhile.
And, if you're only interested in certain values of foo_a or bar_id
then partial indexes might be helpful but still cheap enough to
maintain in a large table.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2008-04-02 19:26:53 | Re: (FAQ?) JOIN condition - 'WHERE NULL = NULL' |
Previous Message | Richard Broersma | 2008-04-02 19:08:16 | Re: (FAQ?) JOIN condition - 'WHERE NULL = NULL' |