Re: Very specialised query
| От | Matthew Wakeling | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Very specialised query | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | alpine.DEB.2.00.0903301101410.21772@aragorn.flymine.org обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: Very specialised query ("Marc Mamin" <M.Mamin@intershop.de>) | 
| Ответы | 
                	
            		Re: Very specialised query
            		
            		 | 
		
| Список | pgsql-performance | 
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Marc Mamin wrote: > if your data are mostly static and you have a few mains objects, > maybe you can have some gain while defining conditional indexes for those plus one for the rest > and then slicing the query: Maybe. I thought about doing that. However, I am not convinced that would be much of a gain, and would require major rewriting of the queries, as you suggest. > WHERE (l2.start BETWEEN l1.start AND l1.end > OR > l1.start BETWEEN l2.start AND l2.end > ) Yes, that's another way to calculate an overlap. However, it turns out to not be that fast. The problem is that OR there, which causes a bitmap index scan, as the leaf of a nested loop join, which can be rather slow. Matthew -- I'd try being be a pessimist, but it probably wouldn't work anyway.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: