Hi all
I have got lot of information from ur group.
Now i want to relieve from this group.
I kindly request all of you.
Plz unsubcribe me.
Thankz a lot
RameshÂ
On 9/3/05, Matteo Beccati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:> Returning to Matteo's original query, what we are saying is that t
Simon Riggs wrote:
Returning to Matteo's original query, what we are saying is that the new
optimization for MIN/MAX queries doesn't work with inherited tables.
It could do, by running optimize_minmax_aggregates() for each query that
gets planned to see if a better plan exists for each child t
On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 12:20 +0200, Matteo Beccati wrote:
> I'm using inherited tables to partition some data which can grow very
> large. Recently I discovered that a simple query that on a regular table
> would use an index was instead using seq scans (70s vs a guessed 2s).
> The well known quer
The correct strategy IMHO would
be applying the order by and limit for each child table (which results
in an index scan, if possible), appending, then finally sorting a bunch
of rows, and limiting again.
This would be a win in some cases, and in many others a loss (ie, wasted
sort steps). The h
Hi,
The correct strategy IMHO would
be applying the order by and limit for each child table (which results
in an index scan, if possible), appending, then finally sorting a bunch
of rows, and limiting again.
This would be a win in some cases, and in many others a loss (ie, wasted
sort steps)
Matteo Beccati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The correct strategy IMHO would
> be applying the order by and limit for each child table (which results
> in an index scan, if possible), appending, then finally sorting a bunch
> of rows, and limiting again.
This would be a win in some cases, and i
Simon Riggs wrote:
The query plan generated when running the query on a table which has
inheritance forces the planner to choose a seq_scan for each table.
Wouldn't be a good thing to also promote ORDER BYs and LIMITs to each
subscan (like WHERE does)?
The tuple_fraction implied by LIMIT is a
On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 12:20 +0200, Matteo Beccati wrote:
> I'm using inherited tables to partition some data which can grow very
> large. Recently I discovered that a simple query that on a regular table
> would use an index was instead using seq scans (70s vs a guessed 2s).
> The well known que
