On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Samuel Gendler
wrote:
> If I could figure out either a query structure or an index structure which
> will force the fast query plan, I'd be much happier. So that is what I am
> looking for - an explanation of how I might convince the planner to always
> use the fa
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Lucas Madar wrote:
> On 05/11/2011 09:38 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>
>>> However, if I disable seqscan (set enable_seqscan=false), I get the
>>> following plan:
>>>
>>> QUERY PLAN
>>>
>>> Hash Join (cost=10001298843.53..290002337961.71 rows=8643757 w
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:02 AM, Svetlin Manavski <
svetlin.manav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am now a bit puzzled after the initial satisfaction by Marinos' reply.
>
> 1. what do you mean exactly by "to ensure your UNION succeeds". The dblink
> docs do not mention anything about issues using directl
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Samuel Gendler
wrote:
> If I could figure out either a query structure or an index structure which
> will force the fast query plan, I'd be much happier. So that is what I am
> looking for - an explanation of how I might convince the planner to always
> use the fa
Here's the setup:
I'm cross joining two dimensions before left outer joining to a fact table
so that I can throw a default value into the resultset wherever a value is
missing from the fact table. I have a time dimension and another dimension.
I want the cross join to only cross a subset of rows
