Mike Mascari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> as you can see, over ten runs for each category, GEQO loses big. I get
> (in seconds):
> label | count | avg | stddev
> -+---++-
> NO GEQO PLAN|10 | 0.8809 | 0.0056460408
Tom Lane wrote:
Mike Mascari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Uh ... dare I ask whether you think it's too high? Or too low?
Too low. In fact, after testing some of my queries which are a bit large
(# of tables) in size, I usually just wind up turning it off.
Well
Mike Mascari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Uh ... dare I ask whether you think it's too high? Or too low?
>>
> Too low. In fact, after testing some of my queries which are a bit large
> (# of tables) in size, I usually just wind up turning it off.
Well, that's why it's config
Tom Lane wrote:
Mike Mascari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But just as a quick notice to those upgrading from 7.3 to 7.4 with fully
normalized databases requiring > 11 joins, the GEQO setting can be a
killer...
Uh ... dare I ask whether you think it's too high? Or too low?
Too low. In
Mike Mascari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But just as a quick notice to those upgrading from 7.3 to 7.4 with
fully
normalized databases requiring > 11 joins, the GEQO setting can be a
killer...
Uh ... dare I ask whether you think it's too high? Or too low?
Just a data point: With a fresh 7.4 and
Mike Mascari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But just as a quick notice to those upgrading from 7.3 to 7.4 with fully
> normalized databases requiring > 11 joins, the GEQO setting can be a
> killer...
Uh ... dare I ask whether you think it's too high? Or too low?
regards,
