>Since that's on the outside of a nestloop, the 169x rowcount error
>translates directly to a 169x error in the total runtime estimate ---
>and it looks like that's not very far at all from the real ratio,
>so the other estimates are pretty good.
You're correct - the query's exercising a very smal
>Steve McLellan writes:
>> Thanks! Installing 8.4 and setting cursor_tuple_fraction to 1.0 does seem
to
>> force it to execute in the same time as not using the cursor, and we'll
>> probably go with this solution (the only reason we're using cursors is to
>&
n the explain
- the DECLARE syntax doesn't seem to allow it. Do I need to do it through
plpgsql?
Thanks again,
Steve McLellan
