Melese Tesfaye <mtesf...@gmail.com> writes:
> [ test case ]
Argh. The problem query has a plan like this:
-> Merge Join (cost=1084.06..1354.58 rows=4 width=13)
Merge Cond: (table2_t.pnr_id = a.pnr_id)
-> stuff ...
-> Index Scan using table1_t_pnr_id_idx5 on table1_t a
(cost=0.00..12.60 rows=4 width=13)
Index Cond: (pnr_id = ANY ('{1801,2056}'::integer[]))
which means the indexscan has to support mark/restore calls. And it
looks like I blew it on mark/restore support when I taught btree to
handle =ANY conditions natively,
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=9e8da0f75731aaa7605cf4656c21ea09e84d2eb1
Will look into fixing that tomorrow. In the meantime, you should be
able to work around this with "set enable_mergejoin = off".
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
