Re: performance of implicit join vs. explicit conditions on inet queries?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: performance of implicit join vs. explicit conditions on inet queries?
Дата
Msg-id 29864.1130768650@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: performance of implicit join vs. explicit conditions on inet queries?  ("Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu>)
Список pgsql-performance
"Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu> writes:
> "Robert Edmonds" <edmonds42@bellsouth.net> wrote
>> Instead of specifying explicit address ranges in the query, I'd like
>> to store the ranges in a table:

> Good illustration. I guess we have a problem of the historgram statistical
> information.

No, that's completely irrelevant to his problem.  The reason we can't do
this is that the transformation from "x << const" to a range check on x
is a plan-time transformation; there's no mechanism in place to do it
at runtime.  This is not easy to fix, because the mechanism that's doing
it is primarily intended for LIKE/regex index optimization, and in that
case a runtime pattern might well not be optimizable at all.

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Merlin Moncure"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Best way to check for new data.
Следующее
От: Chris Mair
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: SOLVED: insertion of bytea