On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Karl Denninger wrote:
> There was a previous thread and I referenced it. I don't have the other one
> in my email system any more to follow up to it.
>
> I give up; the attack-dog crowd has successfully driven me off. Ciao.
Another more standard sql approach is to
There was a previous thread and I referenced it. I don't have the other
one in my email system any more to follow up to it.
I give up; the attack-dog crowd has successfully driven me off. Ciao.
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Karl Denninger escribió:
>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>
>
>>> You never
Karl Denninger escribió:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > You never showed us any EXPLAIN results,
> Yes I did. Go back and look at the archives. I provided full EXPLAIN
> and EXPLAIN ANALYZE results for the original query. Sheesh.
You did? Where? This is your first message in this thread:
http://archi
Tom Lane wrote:
> Karl Denninger writes:
>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> In that case you'd be wasting your time to get it to use an index
>>> for the condition anyway. Maybe you need to take a step back and
>>> look at the query as a whole rather than focus on this particular
>>> condition.
Karl Denninger writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> In that case you'd be wasting your time to get it to use an index
>> for the condition anyway. Maybe you need to take a step back and
>> look at the query as a whole rather than focus on this particular
>> condition.
> The query, sans this condition, i
Tom Lane wrote:
> Karl Denninger writes:
>
>> That doesn't help in this case as the returned set will typically be
>> quite large, with the condition typically being valid on anywhere from
>> 10-80% of the returned tuples.
>>
>
> In that case you'd be wasting your time to get it to use an
Karl Denninger writes:
> That doesn't help in this case as the returned set will typically be
> quite large, with the condition typically being valid on anywhere from
> 10-80% of the returned tuples.
In that case you'd be wasting your time to get it to use an index
for the condition anyway. Mayb
Tom Lane wrote:
> Merlin Moncure writes:
>
>> If you are only interested in one or a very small number of cases of
>> 'permission', you can use an expression index to target constant
>> values:
>>
>
>
>> "select ... from where .. and (permission & mask = permission)"
>>
>
Merlin Moncure writes:
> If you are only interested in one or a very small number of cases of
> 'permission', you can use an expression index to target constant
> values:
> "select ... from where .. and (permission & mask = permission)"
> create index foo_permission_xyz_idx on foo((64 &
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Karl,
>
>> For reference, I was having SEVERE performance problems with the
>> following comparison in an SQL statement where "mask" was an integer:
>>
>> "select ... from where .. and (permission & mask = permission)"
>
> AFAIK, the onl
10 matches
Mail list logo
