"Qingqing Zhou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Obviously it matches your expectation.
Hm? I don't see any improvement there:
> --Before patch --
> real 0m1.149s
> real 0m1.121s
> real 0m1.128s
> -- After patch --
> real 0m1.275s
> real 0m4.063s
> real 0m1.259s
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
