"Carlo Stonebanks" writes:
>>> Having said that, modern versions of the planner seem to deal reasonably
>>> well with this situation as long as they're being asked to push the
>>> condition through a UNION ALL. Do you really need a UNION in that view?
> This is PG v 8.3 - do you mean "modern" co
N vs. UNION ALL, I think in this case UNION ALL would
do.
Carlo
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Sent: August 12, 2010 6:48 PM
To: Carlo Stonebanks
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Very bad plan when using VIEW and IN (SELECT...*)
"Carlo Stonebanks" writes:
> Ref these two queries against a view:
> -- QUERY 1, executes < 0.5 secs
> SELECT *
> FROM mdx_core.vw_provider AS p
> WHERE provider_id IN (13083101)
> -- QUERY 2, executes > 13.5 secs
> SELECT *
> FROM mdx_core.vw_provider AS p
> WHERE provider_id IN (SELECT 13083101
Oops, my bad - this should be in PG PERFORM! Posting it there...
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
