Tom Lane wrote:
The planner does not look for this type of situation though, and after
some study I think it'd be more trouble than it was worth. It'd be
less than trivial to determine whether the upper references occurred
only in places where it was safe to pull them up, and the actual
pulli
"John D. Burger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... WHERE sense.synsetid
> IN (SELECT synset2id FROM semlinkref
> WHERE synset1id
> IN (SELECT synsetid FROM sense
> WHERE wordid = (SELECT wordid FROM word WHERE
> lemma='scramble'))
> AND linkid
OOPs!
--- Richard Broersma Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- "John D. Burger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My question is, should the planner have figured this out, and we're
> > just losing out because we're stuck in 7.4? Or is there some subtle
> > difference in semantics I'm missing?
--- "John D. Burger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My question is, should the planner have figured this out, and we're
> just losing out because we're stuck in 7.4? Or is there some subtle
> difference in semantics I'm missing? The select results were the
> same in both cases, but I'm willin
Hi -
A colleague presented the following very slow query to me:
SELECT DISTINCT lemma FROM word
JOIN sense USING (wordid)
JOIN synset USING (synsetid)
WHERE sense.synsetid
IN (SELECT synset2id FROM semlinkref
WHERE synset1id
IN (SELECT synsetid FROM sens
