Re: Looks like merge join planning time is too big, 55 seconds

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alvaro Herrera
Тема Re: Looks like merge join planning time is too big, 55 seconds
Дата
Msg-id 20130802162344.GN5669@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Looks like merge join planning time is too big, 55 seconds  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Looks like merge join planning time is too big, 55 seconds  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-performance
Tom Lane escribió:
> Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Sergey Burladyan <eshkinkot@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> If I not mistaken, may be two code paths like this here:
> >> (1) mergejoinscansel -> scalarineqsel-> ineq_histogram_selectivity -> get_actual_variable_range -> index_getnext
> >> (2) scalargtsel -> scalarineqsel -> ineq_histogram_selectivity -> get_actual_variable_range -> index_getnext
>
> > Yeah, I think you are correct.
>
> mergejoinscansel does *not* call scalarineqsel, nor get_actual_variable_range.
> It calls get_variable_range, which only looks at the pg_statistic entries.

Uh?  It's right there in line 2976 in HEAD.


--
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Sergey Burladyan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Looks like merge join planning time is too big, 55 seconds
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: subselect requires offset 0 for good performance.