On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 3:34 AM, Rafia Sabih
<rafia.sabih@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> 9 | 62928.88 | 59077.909
Thanks Rafia. At first glance this plan is using the Parallel Shared
Hash in one place where it should pay off, that is loading the orders
table, but the numbers are terrible. I noticed that it uses batch
files and then has to increase the number of batch files, generating a
bunch of extra work, even though it apparently overestimated the
number of rows, though that's only ~9 seconds of ~60. I am
investigating.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com