Re: Performance of a query

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Edmund Dengler
Тема
Re: Performance of a query
Дата
Msg-id
Pine.BSO.4.44.0306112112270.149-100000@cyclops4.esentire.com
Ответ на
Re: Performance of a query (Bruno Wolff III)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Performance of a query Edmund Dengler <edmundd@eSentire.com>
Re: Performance of a query Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
Re: Performance of a query Edmund Dengler <edmundd@eSentire.com>
Re: Performance of a query Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
Re: Performance of a query Edmund Dengler <edmundd@eSentire.com>
Re: Performance of a query Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
Tried the query. Looks like this suffers the same fate as now(): the
planner does not deal with this as a pseudo constant, so therefore the
estimator over-estimates the number of possible rows, and thereby chooses
the wrong operator (a "merge join") to apply.

Regards,
Ed

On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Bruno Wolff III wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 20:51:39 -0400,
>   Edmund Dengler  wrote:
> > Doesn't seem to exist.
> >
> > select current_user; ==> works.
> >
> > select local_timestamp; ==> "ERROR: Attribute "local_timestamp" not
> > found".
> >
> > Is this perhaps a deprecated constant? (Currently running 7.3.3)
>
> There isn't an underline. Sorry about that. It is in both 7.3 and 7.4.
> Its documented under date time functions under operators and functions.
>

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления
От: Bruno Wolff III
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Performance of a query
От: Ardell Dzaky
Дата:
Сообщение: test - pls ignore
FAQ