Re: [PERFORM] sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan

2009-10-30 Thread Robert Haas
2009/10/30 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz : > for explains, use http://explain.depesz.com/ > besides, why are you using left join ? > equivlent of IN () is just JOIN, not LEFT JOIN. > And please, format your query so it readable without twisting eyeballs > before sending. I prefer to have things posted to th

Re: [PERFORM] sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan

2009-10-30 Thread Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
for explains, use http://explain.depesz.com/ besides, why are you using left join ? equivlent of IN () is just JOIN, not LEFT JOIN. And please, format your query so it readable without twisting eyeballs before sending.

Re: [PERFORM] sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan

2009-10-29 Thread Anj Adu
I had posted this on another thread..but did not get a response..here it is again explain analyze select thedate,sent.watch as wat, nod.point as fwl, act.acttype, intf.pointofcontact, func.getNum(snum) as sss, func.getNum(dnum) as ddd, dddport, aaa.aaacol,szone.ssszn as ssszone, dzone.dddzn as dd

Re: [PERFORM] sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan

2009-10-29 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Anj Adu wrote: > Join did not help. A sequential scan is still being done. The > hardcoded value in the IN clause performs the best. The time > difference is more than an order of magnitude. If you want help debugging a performance problem, you need to post your

Re: [PERFORM] sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan

2009-10-29 Thread Bob Lunney
s. Bob --- On Thu, 10/29/09, Anj Adu wrote: > From: Anj Adu > Subject: Re: [PERFORM] sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan > To: "Angayarkanni" > Cc: "Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz" , > pgsql-performance@postgresql.org > Date: Thursday, October 29, 200

Re: [PERFORM] sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan

2009-10-29 Thread Anj Adu
Join did not help. A sequential scan is still being done. The hardcoded value in the IN clause performs the best. The time difference is more than an order of magnitude. 2009/10/29 Angayarkanni : > > 2009/10/29 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Anj Adu wrote: >>> >>>

Re: [PERFORM] sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan

2009-10-29 Thread Angayarkanni
2009/10/29 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Anj Adu wrote: > >> Postgres consistently does a sequential scan on the child partitions >> for this query >> >> select * from partitioned_table >> where partitioned_column > current_timestamp - interval 8 days >> where x in

Re: [PERFORM] sub-select in IN clause results in sequential scan

2009-10-29 Thread Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Anj Adu wrote: > Postgres consistently does a sequential scan on the child partitions > for this query > > select * from partitioned_table > where partitioned_column > current_timestamp - interval 8 days > where x in (select yy from z where colname like 'aaa%') >