On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Tim Uckun <timuc...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Brian Hirt <bh...@me.com> wrote: >>> >>> There are only two tables in the query. >>> >> >> Tim, >> >> No, your query is written incorrectly. I don't understand why you come on >> to this list all hostile and confrontational. Regardless, people still try >> to help you and then you still ignore the advice of people that are giving >> you the solutions to your problems. > > > I don't think I was hostile. I think people were hostile to me as a > matter of fact. > > I asked a question and the first reply was really snarky and unhelpful.
Agreed. But when Tom pointed out the problem in your query you were quite sure you couldn't be wrong. When I asked you to run explain to see what kind of row estimate you got, I got no answer. This was a query problem not a hardware tuning problem. The best step for getting a good answer is forming a good question. So, has changing the query made it faster? Did explain show what I expect, a huge cartesian product? Just guessing. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
