On 07/13/2011 12:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mario Splivalo<mario.splivalo@megafon.hr> writes:
>> On 07/12/2011 10:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What you need to look into is why the estimated join size is 9400 rows
>>> when the actual join size is zero. Are both tables ANALYZEd? Are you
>>> intentionally selecting rows that have no join partners?
>
>> Yes, both tables have been ANALYZEd. What do you mean, intentilnaly
>> selecting rows taht have no join partners?
>
> I'm wondering why the actual join size is zero. That seems like a
> rather unexpected case for a query like this.
Yes, seems that planer gets confused by LIMIT. This query:
select * from tubesite_object join tubesite_image on id=object_ptr_id
where site_id = 8 and pub_date < '2011-07-12 13:25:00' order by pub_date
desc ;
Does not choose Nested Loop, and is done instantly (20 ms), and returns
no rows. However, if I add LIMIT at the end, it chooses NestedLoop and
it takes 500ms if I'm alone on the server, and 10+ seconds if there 50+
connections on the server.
Mario