On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Mark Wong" <mark...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 2:25 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Are any of the queries complicated enough to trigger GEQO planning? > >> Is there a debug option that we could use to see? > > Well, you could set geqo=off and see if the behavior changes, but > it'd be easier just to count how many tables are in each query ...
Sorry for the delay in responding, here's the queries and the number of tables in each: Q1: 1 Q2: 2 Q3: 3 Q4: 1 Q5: 6 Q6: 1 Q7: 6 (5 unique) + 1 temp table Q8: 8 (7 uniqie) + 1 temp table Q9: 6 + 1 temp table Q10: 4 Q11: 3 Q12: 2 Q13: 3 + 1 temp table Q14: 2 Q15: 5 Q16: 2 Q17: 2 Q18: 3 Q19: 2 Q20: 2 Q21: 4 Q22: 3 + 1 temp table Regards, Mark -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
