On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> Now my question is why the 7.4 choose the hash join ? :-(
It looks to me that the marge join is faster because there wasn't really
anything to merge, it resulted in 0 rows. Maybe the hash join that is
choosen in 7.4 would have been faster had there been a couple of result
rows (just a guess).
It would be interesting to compare the plans in 7.4 with and without
hash_join active and see what costs it estimates for a merge join compared
to a hash join.
--
/Dennis Björklund